District Jaipur, Rajasthan. vs District Jaipur.

: Mr. Prakul Khurana, Mr. Nilimesh Sen for Mr. Sanjay Jhanwar, Sr. Adv. For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 24/02/2025

1. Instant civil writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was filed by the petitioners way back on 15.04.2014, seeking following relief:- "1. Issue appropriate writ/order/direction declaring the impugned acquisition proceedings as lapsed in terms of section 20F(2) of the Act and thereby quashing and nullifying the impugned notification dated 10.09.2010 [2025:RJ-JP:8256] (2 of 5) [CW-5923/2014] (Annexure 1) published u/s 20A (1) and the impugned notification dated 01.04.2011 (Annexure 2) published u/s 20E(1) of the Act.

2. Issue appropriate writ/order/direction quashing/nullifying the impugned document dated nil titled "vfHkfu.kZ;" (Annexure-9) and impugned notice/intimation dated 1.1.2013 received on 11.2.2013 (Annexure-5).

3. Issue appropriate writ/order/direction declaring and quashing the consequential impugned mutation dated 03.10.2012 (Annexure-3) in the land revenue record transferring title of the land in the name of railway as without authority of law.

4. Grant such further relief/relief(s), which in the facts and circumstances of this case may do the petitioners; complete justice Any other order/direction, which the

5. Hon'ble court deems appropriate"

2. Counsel for petitioners has argued that the notification under Section 20-E(1) of the Railways Act, 1989 was published on 01.04.2011 and the final award has not been passed within one year therefrom, hence, by virtue of operation of Section 20F(2) of the Railways Act, 1989, the entire proceedings for acquisition of land stands lapsed. As such, it has been prayed that the acquisition of the land of petitioners be declared lapsed and land be restored in the name of petitioners in the revenue record.

3. Counsel for petitioners has placed reliance on the judgment passed in case of Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India Vs. Subodh Singh [2011 (11) SCC 100].

4. Heard. Considered. [2025:RJ-JP:8256] (3 of 5) [CW-5923/2014]

5. Section 20F(2) of the Railways Act, 1989 reads as under:- "(2) The competent authority shall make an award under this section within a period of one year from the date of the publication of the declaration and if no award is made within that period, the entire proceedings for the acquisition of the land shall lapse:

6. The proviso appended to Section 20F makes it clear that the period of one year envisaged therein is not mandatory and the competent authority may extend the period for a further period of six months, and further the person aggrieved is entitled for the interest for delayed period.

7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India (supra) has held and observed that the period of one year would run from the date when notification under Section 20-E (1) was Gazetted and not from the date when public notice of notification was published in newspapers. Further, it was also held that recording of reasons for expansion of extension of period of six months beyond the period of one year is not mandatory for the competent authority.

8. In the case at hand, lands belonging to petitioners were acquired by the Railway Board for development of a Railway project in the name of "Dedicated Freight Corridor" in order to connect the Railway line Rewari to Jawahar Lal Port Trust. Undisputedly, lands belonging to petitioners [2025:RJ-JP:8256] (4 of 5) [CW-5923/2014] were falling in the route thorough which the special rail project is to be developed, hence, their lands were acquired and it is undisputed fact that the possession of lands have already been taken.

9. In the writ petition so also in the arguments, petitioners have not disclosed the exact date of notifying the notification issued under Section 20-E (1) in the Gazette Notification and petitioners is placing reliance only on the publication of public notice for notification in the newspaper on 01.04.2011. It is also undisputed case of petitioners that pursuant to land acquisition proceedings, the mutation of land in question as entered into in the name of Railways on 03.10.2012. Obviously, final award has been passed prior thereto. It is not in dispute that possession of lands have already been taken from the petitioners. In view of such factual matrix, the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Dedicated Freight Corridor Corporation of India (supra), relied upon by counsel for petitioner, does not render any support to the case of petitioners, seeking to declare the acquisition proceedings as lapsed in terms of Section 20F(2) of the Act of 1989. Petitioner has not make out any case for claiming interest on the delayed period nor any such prayer has been made, however, it is hereby observed that in case it is established by the petitioners that the award was passed after a delay of one year, [2025:RJ-JP:8256] (5 of 5) [CW-5923/2014] petitioners may claim interest for the delayed period, if law of limitation permits.

10. With the aforesaid observations, but without allowing relief prayed for by the petitioners in the present petition, the instant writ petition is hereby disposed of. No costs.

11. Stay application and other pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. NITIN /21 (SUDESH BANSAL),J