Land acquisition: SC to await outcome of constitution bench decision

A day after a five-judge constitution bench said it would test the correctness of two separate verdicts given by its benches of similar strength on land acquisition matters, the Supreme Court today deferred hearing on another such matter for three months to await the outcome of deliberations before the larger bench.
A three-judge bench was informed that a five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra had yesterday decided to deliberate upon all aspects relating to the issue.
A matter relating to land acquisition in Haryana today came up for hearing before a bench comprising Justices Madan B Lokur, Kurian Joseph and Deepak Gupta.

Senior advocate P S Patwalia, representing one of the parties, referred to the five-judge bench order and said it would be appropriate if this matter was referred to the larger bench.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi also suggested to the court that the matter be adjourned for July so that the larger bench could decide on the issue pending there.
The constitution bench would consider the correctness of two separate verdicts passed in Pune Municipal Corporation case and Indore Development Authority case which dealt with the issue of interpretation of Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

The larger bench had yesterday said it was of the "prima facie view" that a three-judge bench cannot hold the verdict of an earlier three-judge bench 'per incuriam' (without due regard to the law).

A three-judge bench headed by Justice M B Lokur had on February 21 observed that if "judicial discipline" and propriety were not maintained, the institution will "go forever" while referring to the February 8 verdict passed by another three-judge bench which had held that compensation not availed within a stipulated five year period would not be a ground for cancellation of land acquisition.
It had said that perhaps there have been a tinkering with judicial discipline in arriving at a conclusion in the February 8 verdict as the issue should have been referred to a larger bench in case of difference of opinion, as the 2014 judgement had held that non-payment of compensation would be a ground to cancel the land acquisition.

In its February 8 judgement, the apex court with a 2:1 majority view, had held the 2014 verdict of another three-judge bench in Pune Municipal Corporation case was passed without due regard to the law (as per incuriam) and had said that land acquired could not be quashed due to delay on part of land owners in accepting compensation within five years due to litigation or other reasons.
The 2014 verdict was rendered unanimously by a three-judge bench which had held that "the deposit of compensation amount in the government treasury is of no avail and cannot be held to be equivalent to compensation paid to the landowners/persons interested".