Calcutta High Court confirms that when land was requisitioned under repealed statutes but no acquisition award was made within the statutory period, the authority must initiate fresh acquisition proceedings under the 2013 Act (Act XXX of 2013) and pay just compensation and rent for the entire period of state use. Upholds and applies prior coordinate bench decision on identical facts, establishing binding authority for State authorities and Special Land Acquisition Officers within West Bengal.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WPA/17851/2024 of AMAL KUMAR BERA AND ORS Vs THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. CNR WBCHCA0343562024 |
| Date of Registration | 11-07-2024 |
| Decision Date | 28-10-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISPOSED |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE JUSTICE PARTHA SARATHI SEN |
| Court | Calcutta High Court |
| Precedent Value | Binding within West Bengal; persuasive outside jurisdiction |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms WPA 17757 of 2024 (20.05.2025, Sadhan Narayan Kundu and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.) |
| Type of Law | Land Acquisition; Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction |
| Questions of Law | Whether fresh acquisition proceedings and compensation under Act XXX of 2013 are mandatory when land was requisitioned long ago and no acquisition award was made within the period prescribed under the governing statutes. |
| Ratio Decidendi | If land is requisitioned by the State and, after statutory repeal and notification, no award of compensation is made within the time prescribed by law, the land must be acquired afresh following the provisions of Act XXX of 2013. Just compensation must be determined and paid in accordance with that Act. Moreover, the landholder is entitled to rent for the use of their land for the entire period the land was in possession of the State. The Special Land Acquisition Officer is duty-bound to initiate and complete such proceedings within a strict timeframe. |
| Judgments Relied Upon | WPA 17757 of 2024 (Sadhan Narayan Kundu and Ors. v. The State of West Bengal and Ors., Calcutta High Court, 20.05.2025) |
| Logic / Jurisprudence / Authorities Relied Upon by the Court | Applied coordinate bench reasoning that absence of a compensatory award after requisition and repeal requires initiation of fresh proceedings and compensation under Act XXX of 2013. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | Petitioners’ land was requisitioned on 06.04.1979 under Act II of 1948; after repeal, notice under Section 4(1a) was published but no award of compensation was made. The authority admitted this in orders from January 2024. 80% of structure value was given to structure owners, but land compensation was not awarded. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All State authorities and Special Land Acquisition Officers in West Bengal; subordinate courts in West Bengal |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts and possibly the Supreme Court regarding similar factual situations |
| Follows | WPA 17757 of 2024 (Sadhan Narayan Kundu and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.) |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Where land was requisitioned decades ago and no acquisition award was made within statutory timelines, a writ court may direct initiation of fresh acquisition under the 2013 Act.
- Landowners are entitled not only to compensation under Act XXX of 2013 but also to rent for the entire duration the land was used by the State up to the initiation of the 2013 Act proceeding.
- Assessment and disbursement of rent and compensation must be completed within the strict time limits fixed by the court (120 working days for proceeding, 4 weeks for payment thereafter).
- The precedent affirms prior Calcutta High Court authority, making it a binding practice within the jurisdiction.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The court examined documents and previous authority orders, noting that the State had requisitioned the petitioners’ land on 06.04.1979 under Act II of 1948, and no award was made even after the Act’s repeal.
- It was recorded (from the authority’s own orders) that although the Section 4(1a) notice under the relevant Act was published, no compensation award was published within the statutory period.
- The court relied on a prior coordinate bench judgment (WPA 17757 of 2024) on identical facts, where fresh proceedings under the 2013 Act were mandated.
- The State’s argument that 80% of the structure value was paid to structure owners was noted but found insufficient as no compensation was ever assessed or awarded for the land itself.
- The court underscored that the Special Land Acquisition Officer was under a duty to assess and disburse full compensation and rent strictly following the Act XXX of 2013, and within peremptory timelines.
- Thus, the court directed initiation and completion of a fresh acquisition process under Act XXX of 2013 and payment of just compensation and rent for the period of state possession.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
- No compensation was ever awarded for the land despite requisition and state possession since 1979.
- Authorities in prior cases with identical facts were directed to initiate fresh acquisition proceedings under Act XXX of 2013 and pay just compensation.
- Relief sought in line with the precedent set in Sadhan Narayan Kundu and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Ors.
Respondent
- Claimed that 80% of the structure value was paid to the structure owners per order dated 31.01.2024.
Factual Background
The petitioners’ land, measuring 5 decimals and detailed in the petition, was requisitioned by the State authority on 06.04.1979 under Act II of 1948. Following repeal of the Act, a statutory notice was published, but no acquisition award or compensation for the land was issued to the petitioners within the prescribed period. Only partial compensation for structures (80% of value) was paid to structure owners. The petitioners sought a writ directing the authority to take fresh steps and pay compensation under Act XXX of 2013.
Statutory Analysis
- The court identified that the original requisition was under Act II of 1948, since repealed.
- Noted that even after notice under Section 4(1a), no award was made within the statutory period.
- Recognized that the governing law for fresh acquisition is now Act XXX of 2013 (The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013).
- Direction issued for the acquisition and compensation process to be conducted strictly as per Act XXX of 2013.
Procedural Innovations
- The court set peremptory and mandatory outer limits for completion of the acquisition proceeding (120 working days) and for payment of compensation (4 weeks thereafter).
- Special direction to assess and pay rent for the full period from the date of requisition/state possession till initiation of a fresh proceeding under the 2013 Act.
- Express authorization for the advocate-on-record to communicate and serve the order directly to the authority, with the authority bound to act upon a server copy.
Alert Indicators
- Precedent Followed – The judgment applies and affirms existing Calcutta High Court precedent.