Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition for Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Allows Landowner to Seek Fair Compensation.


23 September 2025 Land Acquistion >> Property & Real Estate  

On 23 September 2025, the Supreme Court rejected a group of special leave petitions raised by P.M. Sankaran, who had objected to the acquisition of his land by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board. The petitions were based on a March 2025 Madras High Court judgment that had turned down allegations that the acquisition had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

The panel of Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan, and N. Kotiswar Singh observed that the acquisition went back over two decades. The Land Acquisition Act Section 4 notification was issued in August 1999, and a declaration was made in October 2000. Awards were made between 2002 and 2006 afterwards. Of 1228.49 acres to be acquired, approximately 466.49 acres were assigned to the Housing Board for a residential scheme for poor communities. The land of the petitioner was included in the block assigned.


 

 
 
 

The Court noticed that possession of the petitioner's land was already taken and compensation paid. Although some of the acquisition had been nullified previously in independent proceedings, the petitioner had not been joined thereto and only came to the High Court after a considerable lapse of time, in 2012. In such a situation, the Supreme Court held it was "too far-fetched" to invoke Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, which has the effect of annulling land acquisitions where possession is not taken or compensation not given.

In accordance with the same, the Supreme Court declined to intervene with the judgment of the High Court and rejected the petitions. Yet, the bench extended liberty to the petitioner for approaching the Reference Court for determination of a reasonable market value of his land. The Court issued a direction for such a claim to be considered expeditiously in terms of law.

Practical Legal Takeaways:
  • Section 24(2 of 2013 Act): Relief is offered where acquisition has been made but either compensation has not been received or possession has not been handed over. But the moment both the requirements are met, it cannot be called.
  • Delay defeats equity: Those who fail to challenge acquisition within time cannot benefit by praying for parity with previous petitioners. Courts always disapprove of stale claims.
  • Compensation still available: Even after failure of challenges to acquisition, landowners who are affected have the right to seek the Reference Court under the Land Acquisition Act for higher compensation.
  • Benefit to society as a factor: Courts consider public interest and development needs, particularly when housing for marginalised groups is involved.


RIGHT TO FAIR COMPENSATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN LAND ACQUISITION, REHABILITATION AND RESETTLEMENT ACT, 2013