Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

In the present case, what is the object and purpose of legal fiction provided for by the legislature under Section 24 (2) of the Act, 2013 is to be considered. Sub-section (2) of Section 24 of the Act, 2013 is applicable only where an award under Section 11 has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of this Act. The Act, 2013 commences from 01/1/2014. Thus, sub-section (2) of Section 24 of the Act, 2013 shall apply only when the award was made on or before 01/1/2009. The deeming fiction was created with the object that in those acquisitions where even after the award which has been delivered five years ago, neither the possession has been taken nor the compensation has been paid the acquisition be deemed to have lapsed. The legal fiction created under sub-section (2) of Section 24 of the Act, 2013 is a beneficial legislation which has been intended to extend the benefit to the land owners who have not been paid the compensation even after five years of passing of the award or from whom the possession has not been taken even after five years of expiry of the award. The object is clear that if the possession is not taken even after five years of the expiry of the award there is every presumption that the land is not required for the purpose for which it was acquired. We are thus of the view that sub-section (2) of Section 24 of the Act, 2013 shall become applicable creating a deeming fiction when the award is made on 01/1/2009 or five years before and neither the physical possession of the land has been taken nor the compensation has not been paid to the land owners. At this juncture, we may also note that sub-section (2) of Section 24 of the Act, 2013 uses the words "possession of the land has not been taken." Use of the words "possession of the land has not been taken" which is present perfect continuous tense is for a purpose and object, which indicates that the position which became sometimes past is still continuing thus the non-taking of physical possession as well as the non-payment of compensation has to be continuing on the date when the Act, 2013 was enforced i.e. on 01/1/2014.

(1) ..............
(2) A person not already in the service of the Union or of the State shall only be eligible to be appointed a District Judge if he has been for not less than seven years an advocate or a pleader and is recommended by the High Court for appointment."

Article 233 (2) of the Constitution of India also uses the word "has been for not less than seven years". The Apex Court interpreted the word "has been" in the above case.

In the present case, Section 24 (2) of the Act, 2013 also uses the phrase "physical possession of the land has not been taken". The Apex Court in Deepak Aggarwal's case (supra) held that the use of present perfect continuous tense indicates that a position which began at sometime in the past and is still continuing. Thus, under Section 24 (2) of the Act, 2013 possession of the land has not been taken that situation is to be continued till the enforcement of the Act, 2013. It is useful to refer to paragraph 102 of the judgment in Deepak Aggarwal's case (supra) which is to the following effect:

"102. As regards construction of the expression, "if he has been for not less than seven years an advocate" in Article 233(2) of the Constitution, we think Mr. Prashant Bhushan was right in his submission that this expression means seven years as an advocate immediately preceding the application and not seven years any time in the past. This is clear by use of "has been". The present perfect continuous tense is used for a position which began at some time in the past and is still continuing. Therefore, one of the essential requirements articulated by the above expression in Article 233(2) is that such person must with requisite period be continuing as an advocate on the date of application."