New Delhi – In a significant boost to residential, infrastructure, and metro projects in the national capital, the Supreme Court has validated the acquisition of extensive tracts of land by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (DSIIDC), and Delhi Metro Corporation (DMRC).
This ruling, delivered by a bench comprising Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta, and Ujjal Bhuyan on May 17 and made public on Friday, overturns previous Delhi High Court decisions that had declared these acquisitions lapsed. The acquisitions in question span nearly five decades, from 1957 to 2006, and were initially undertaken under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The High Court had based its earlier ruling on the Land Acquisition Act, 2013, which stipulates that acquisition proceedings initiated under the previous law would be deemed lapsed if compensation was not paid or possession not taken.
The Supreme Court’s judgment allows hundreds of appeals filed by DDA, DSIIDC, and DMRC, thereby upholding the legitimacy of the land acquisitions under the 1894 Act. The bench directed the concerned authorities to take physical possession of lands where compensation has been deposited either in the treasury or in a reference court, ensuring the continuity of crucial public infrastructure projects.
Justice Surya Kant, authoring the 113-page judgment, emphasised that this decision does not preclude landowners from claiming compensation if not already paid, including interest and other statutory benefits under the 1894 Act. The court underscored that, in instances where landowners have potentially suppressed facts, the High Court should establish a dedicated bench to expedite the inquiry and adjudication of such cases.
Furthermore, for cases where land was acquired but possession was not taken or compensation not paid, the Supreme Court has allowed the authorities to initiate fresh acquisition proceedings within a year, by July 31, 2025. These proceedings should adhere to the 2013 Act, ensuring that compensation is calculated based on current market rates.
Ordinarily, land not taken into possession should revert to its original owners. However, given the substantial public interest involved in infrastructure and residential development in Delhi, the court has permitted fresh acquisition under the 2013 law. This approach is seen as advantageous for landowners, as they would receive compensation aligned with prevailing market values.
The Supreme Court also noted that, despite the acquisitions, many landowners continued utilising their land for agricultural purposes. Consequently, there was deemed no necessity for a social impact assessment study or the development of alternative multi-crop, irrigated agricultural land before acquisition. This landmark ruling not only reinforces the legitimacy of historical land acquisitions but also aims to balance the interests of public infrastructure development and fair compensation for landowners, providing a framework for resolving similar disputes in the future.
