DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION OF INDIAversusSUBODH SINGH & ORS.

                       [2011] 3 S.C.R. 1160


A    DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION OF
                            INDIA
                              v.
                 SUBODH SINGH & ORS.
              (Civil Appeal No. 2794 of 2011)
B                        MARCH 30, 2011
         [R.V. RAVEENDRAN AND A.K. PATNAIK, JJ.]

        Railways Act, 1989:
c
      s.20F(2) - Time period for making the award -
  Commencement of - Held: Period of one year. stipulated ul
  s.20F(2) for making the award, has to be reckoned from the
  date of publication of the declaration uls.20E(1) in the official
D gazette - Land acquisition - Compensation.
       s.20E(1) - Publication of notification under -
  Requirement for- Held: s.20E requires the notification to be
  published only in the official gazette - The section does not
  require the notification of declaration to be published in any
E newspaper or by any other mode.
       s.20F(2), first proviso - Award by competent authority
  within six months after the expiry of one year from the date of
  publication of the declaration - Validity of - Held: If the
F competent authority is satisfied that the award could not be
  made within a period of one year due to unavoidable
  circumstances, which are to.be recorded in writing, he could
  make the award within eighteen months - The requirement
  regarding recording of reasons is not mandatory - In the
G instant case, the competent authority while passing award
  proc1~eded under bona fide impression that the notification of
  declc.iration u/s.20E(1) was required to be published not only
  in the official gazette, but also in the form of a public notice
  in two newspapers and that the latter of the two dates of
H                               1160
  DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION 1161
          OF INDIA v. SUBODH SINGH
  publication would be the date of commencement of the period A
  of one year, uls.20F(2) - As a consequence, he applied the
  principle that when publication is required to be made by more
  than one mode, the date of publication by the last of the
. prescribed modes is the date of publication - On the facts of
  the case and on harmonious reading of the provision of s. 20F, B
  the said reasoning in the award is treated ~s the reason for
  the delay in making the award - The acquisition did not,
  therefore. lapse - However, having regard to the second
  proviso to s.20F(2), the land owners are entitled to additional
  compensation for the delay in making of the award at a rate c
  not less than 5% of the value of the award for each month of
  delay.

     Several anomalies in the provisions of Chapter VIA -
 Discussed - Need for legislation - Legislation.
                                                              D
     The land belonging to the first respondent along with
others was acquired for the purpose of special railway
project. The acquisition was under Chapter IVA of the
Railways Act, 1989. A notification dated 10.6.2008 under
Section 20A(1) of the Act was published in official gazette E
on 10.6.2008. This was followed by a declaration dated
12.12.2008 un~er Section 20E(1) of the Act published in
official gazette on 16.12.2008 declaring that the lands
mentioned therein should be acquired for the purpose
mentioned in the notification under Section 20A(1) of the F
Act. A public notice referring to the two notifications and
inviting claims from all the persons interested in tfle lands
was published by the competent authority. in two
newspaper on 20.2'.2009. Thereafter, the competent
authority passed the order on 8.2.2010 determining the G
compensation payable under Section 20F(1) of the Act.
The first respondent filed writ petition for quashing the
award dated 8.2.2010 and for a declaration that the entire
acquisition proceedings stood lapsed under Section
20F(2) of the Act, as the award was not made within one H
    1162   SUPREME COURT REPORTS              [2011] 3 S.C.R.

A year from the date of publication of the date of declaration
  dated 12.12.2008. The High Court allowed the writ petition
  and quashed the award dated 8.2.2010 and declared that
  the acquisition proceedings stood lapsed.
       The questions which arose for consideration in the
8
  Instant appeal were whether the period of one year,
  stipulated under section 20F(2) of the Railways Act, 1989
  for making the award, has to be reckoned from the date
  of publication of the declaration under section 20E(1) of
  the Act in the official gazette or from the date of any
C subsequent publicatfon of the declaration in newspapers
  and whether an award made within six months after the
  expiry of one year from the date of publication of the
  declaration, is valid under the first proviso to section
  20F(2) of the Act, even if reasons are not recorded by the
D competent authority in writing to show that he was
  satisfied that the delay had been caused due to
  unavoidable circumstances.
        Allowing the appeal, the Court
E
       HELD: 1.1. Sub-section (1) of section 20E of the
  Railways Act, 1989 provides that the central government
  shall, on receipt of the report of the competent authority,
  declare by notification that the land should be acquired
  for the purpose mentioned in section 20A(1 ). Sub-section
F (2) of section 20E of the Act provides that on the
  publication of such declaration by notification, by the
  central government, under sub-section (1), the lands ·
  shali vest absolutely in the central government free from
  all encumbrances. Section 20E thus require~ the
G notification to be published only in the official gazette. The
  section does. not require the notification of declaration to
  be pulblished in any newspaper or by any other mode.
  Section 20A(4) relating to preliminary notification requires
  that in addition to publication of a notification by the
H
   DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION 1163
           OF INDIA v. SUBODH SINGH

 central government, of the declaration of its intention to A
 acquire any land, the competent authority shall cause the
 suostance of the notification to be published in two local
 newspapers, one of which will be in a vernacular
 language. Section 20F(4) of the Act requires that before
 proceeding to determine the compensation, the B
 competent authority shall give a public notice in two local
 newspapers inviting claims. Thus, wherever newspaper
 publication is required, it has been specifically provided
 by the legislature. The absence of a similar provision in
 section 20E for publication in newspapers, makes it clear c
 that the publication of the declaration under section
 20E(1) is complete when it is published in the official
 gazette. The publication of the notification under section
 20E(1 ), or its substance, in any newspaper, is not,
 therefore, a requirement under the Act. Even if it is
                                                             0
 published in any newspaper., such publication will be ·
 only for general information and will not serve any
 purpose under the Act. [Para 6] [1176~F-H; 1177-A-C)
       1.2. In the instant case, public notice dated 20.2.2009
  published in the newspapers was not a publication of the         E
  notification of declaration under section 20E(1) of the Act,
  but was a public notice required to be issued under sub-
  section (4) of section 20F by the competent authority
  inviting claims, after the publication of a notification under
  Section 20E(1) of the Act. Even if the public notice in the      F
_ newspapers dated 20.2.2009, was to be regarded as
  publication of the declaration under section 20E(1) of the
  Act, it would not be of any relevance to calculate the
  period of one year under section 20F(2) of the Act. [Para
  7] [1177 ·D·F]                                                   G
      2.1. Sub-section (2) of section 20F of the Act requires .·
 the competent authority to make an award wi~hill ·~ period.
 of one year from the date of publication· of the declaration
 and provides that if no award is made within that period, H
   1164     SUPREME COURT REPORTS               [2011] 3 S.C.R.


A the entire proceedings for acquisition of land shall lapse.
  The term "publication" in section 20F(2) refers to
  publication of the declaration in the official gazette. In this
  case, the declaration under section 20E(1) was made by
  notlfication dated 12.12.2008 which was published in the
s official gazette on 16.12.2008. Therefore, the award ought
  to have been made within one year from 16.12.2008, The
  award made on 8.2.2010, was clearly beyond one year
  from the date of publication of the declaration. If the
  benefit of additional period of six months under the first
c proviso to section 20F(2) is taken, the award made on
  8.2.2010 would be in time and the acquisition
  proceedings would not lapse. The proviso enables the
  competent authority to make the award within an
  extended period of six months if he is satisfied that the
  delay had been caused due to unavoidable
D circumstances and reasons therefor are recorded In
  writing. In this case, admittedly, the competent authority
  has not recorded any reasons In writing to hold that the
  delay was due to unavoidable circumstances. [Paras 8,
E 9) [1178-B-G]
        2.2. In view of the inconsistencies and ambiguities in
  section 20F of the Act, the provisions of the section are
  to be read harmoniously. The effect of such harmonious
  reading would be that the award has to be made within
F one year from the date of publication of the declaration.
  If the competent authority is satisfied that the award could
  not be made within a period of one year due to
  unavoidable circumstances, which are to be recorded in
  writing, he could make the award within eighteen months.
G The requirement regarding recording of reasons is not
  mandatory. The acquisition proceedings will stand
  eclipsed at the end of one year from the date of
  publication if no award is made within one year. If no
  award is made within eighteen months, the proceedings
H for acquisitions would lapse. If the award is made within
 DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION 1165
         OF INDIA v. SUBODH SINGH
 eighteen months, the acquisition will emerge out of the A
 eclipse and will not lapse. But additional compensation
 will become payable for the period beyond one year, as
 provided in the second proviso to section 20F(2). If the
 reasons are not recorded or if the reasons are not
 satisfactory, the additional compensation under the B
 second proviso can be at a rate higher than the minimum
 of 5% per month stipulated in the second proviso to
 section 20F(2). The award dated 8.2.2010 by the
 competent authority proceeded on the basis that the
 notification of declaration under section 20E(1) of the Act c
 has to be published not only in the official gazette, but
 a!so in the form of a public notice in two newspapers and
 that the latter of the two dates of publication would be the
 date of commencement of the period of one year, under
 section 20F(2) of the Act. It is evident from the award that
                                                               0
.the competent authority proceeded under the bonafide
 impression that publication of the public notice under
 section 20F(4) in the two newspapers on 20.2.2009
 referring to the declaration under section 20E(1 ),
 subsequent to the date of gazette publication (16.12.2008) E
 is also part of the process of publication of the
 declaration under section 20E(1 ). As a consequence, he
 applied the principle that when publication is required to
 be made by more than one mode, the date of publication
 by the last of the prescribed modes is the date of
 publication. He, therefore, assumed that the date of F
 publication of the public notice in the two newspapers
 dated 20.2.2009 to be the date of publication .of declaration
 for the purposes of section 20E(1) and 20F(2) of the Act
 and that consequently the award was made within one
 year fro1;• such date. On the facts of the case and on a G
 harmonious "'"'llding of the provision of section 20F of the
 Act, the said reasoning in the award can be treated as the
 rea.son for the delay in making the award. The acquisition
 did not, therefore, lapse. However, having regard to the
 second proviso to section 20F(2/, the land owners H
    1166   SUPREME COURT REPORTS               [2011] 3 S.C.R.


A (described as "entitled persons") would be entitled to
  additional compensation for the delay in making of the
  awal'd at a rate not less than 5% of the value of the award
  for each month of delay. [Paras 10, 11] [1178-H; 1179-A·
  H; 1180-D-H; 1181-A]
B
  Certain anomalies in the provisions of Chapter VIA of the
  Act.

       3.1. Several apparent anomalies in Chapter IVA of the
  Act, in particular in section 20F, require the attention of
C the law makers.
       (i) Sub-section (2) of section 20F provides tha. if no
       award is made within one year from the date. -~
       publication of the declaration, the entire proc" 0 aings
D
       for the acquisition shall lapse. The first proviso to
       sub-section (2) provides that the competent authority
       may, after the expiry of the period of one year, if he
       is satisfied that the delay has been caused due to
       unavoidable circumstances and for reasons to be
       recorded in writing, make an award within an
E      extended period of six months. This means that
       when an award is not made within one year from the
       date of publication of the declaration, the
       proceedings for acquisition would lapse, but if within
       six months of such lapsing, the competent authority
F      makes an award after recording reasons for the
       delay, what stood lapsed would stand revived. But
       if the acquisition proceedings had already lapsed at
       the end of one year, mere making of an award
       thereafter cannot revive the acquisition proceedings,
G      in the absence of any provision in the Act providing
       for revival of the lapsed acquisition.
       (ii) Sub-section (2) of section 20F requires the award
       to be made by the competent authority and the first
H      proviso requires the competent authority to record
DEDICATED·FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION 1167
        OF INDIA v. SUBODH SINGH
  th~ reasons for the delay. What. are "unavoidabl,e         A
  circumstances" leading to the delay which would
 ·enable 01e competent authority to make an award
  beyond one year, would invariably lead to litigations
  as to whether there were unavoidable
  circumstances, whenever the award is made beyor)d          B
  one year. As the consequence of making an award
  beyond one year but within eighteen months,
  involving payment of additional compensation, is set
  out in the second proviso to section 20F(2), there is
  no need for requiring the competent authority to           c
  record reasons in writing showing that the delay was
  due to unavoidable circumstances.
  (iii) The second proviso to section 20F(2) requires
  payment of additional compensation for the delay in
  making of the award, at the rate of not less than five     D
  percent of the value of the award, for each month of
  delay. This vests unguided discretion in the
                                            /

  competent authority or the arbitrator to award
  additional compensation at any higher rate and gives
  room for unnecessary litigation at the instance of         E
  "entitled persons" claiming higher percentages as
  additional compensation. It is necessary to consider
  whether specifying a fixed monthly rate of increase
  would serve the ends of justice better instead of
  indicating a minimum rate per month.                       F

  (iv) Sub-section (1) of section 20F refers to an "order"
  of the competent authority determining the amount
  to be paid for the land acquired. Sub-section (2) refers
  to the competent authority making an "award". It is        G
  r."t clear whether the award by the· competent
  auth .... ity is consequential to the order that is made
  under sub-section (1) of section 20F or whether the
  order under sub~section (1) is itself the award
  referred to in sub-section (2) of section 20F.             H
    1168   SUPREME COURT REPORTS              [2011] 3 S.C.R.


A      Confusion can be avoided by using only one of the
       words -'order' or 'award' - to refer to the decision of
       the competent authority determining compensation,
       at all places.

       (v) Sub-section (4) of section 20F provides that before
B
       determining the amount under sub-section (1) or
       sub-section (3), the competent authority shall give a
       public notice inviting claims from all persons
       interested in land to be acquired. The issue of such
       public notice under section 20F(4) is after the
c      publication of notification of declaration under
       section 20E(1 ). Sub-section (2) of section 2CS::
       provides that on publication of the declaration, the
       land vests in the central government. If the land has
       already vested in the government on publication- of
D      the declaration under section 20E(1 ), the question of
       issuing a public notice thereafter, inviting claims
       under s,ection 20F(4) from persons interested in the
       lands "to be acquired' does not arise. The words "to
       be acquired" may have to be replaced by the words
E      "acquired".

       (vi) If the land has already vested absolutely in the
       Central Government on publication of declaration of
       acquisition in the Official Gazette under section
F      20E(1 ), it is not clear how the proceedings for
       acquisition could lapse if the award is not made
       within one year or even 18 months. This Court while
       dealing with other enactments relating to acquisition
       has held that acquisition would not lapse as
       consequence of not making the award within the
G
       specified time, if the land had already vested in the
       government and the Act does not provide for re-
       vesting in the land owner.

       (vii) Section 201 of the Act provides that though the
H
 DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION 1169
         OF INDIA v. SUBODH SINGH

   land vests in the central government on publication A
   of the declaration under section 20E(1 ), the
   competent authority can demand the surrender or
   delivery of possession only after the compensation
   is determined under section 20F and is deposited
   under sect.ion 20H. Howev.er section 20J provides s
   that once the land vests in the central government
   ":-' puoiication of a declaration under section 20E(2),
   it sh,all be lawful for any persons authorized by the
   central government "to enter and do· other act
    necessary upon the land for carrying out the · c
    building, maintenance, management or operation of
   the special railway project or part thereof or any work
    connected therewith". In other words section 20-J
    enables the central government to enter upon
    possession of the land on publication of the
                                                            0
  _ declaration under section 20E, even before the
    award is made, and carry on the activities connected
    with the special railway project for which the land'
    was acquired. The provisions of section 20J apart
    from being badly worded, are contrary to provisions
    of section 201. Section 20J would lead to deprivation E
    of ,possession of the land to the land owner without
    even determining or offering any compensation. This
    requires to be examined and corrected. Further, there
    is no indication as to what should happen if the
    central government or person authorized by it starts F
    executing the special railway project in the acquired
    land under section 20 J and thereafter, the acquisition
    lapses on account of the award not being made
   within the time frame mentioned in section 20F(2).
    [Para 12] [1181-A-H; 1182-A-H; 1183-A-H; 1184-A-D] G
   3.2. These anomalies are likely to give room for
considerable avoidable litigation, in regard to
acquisitions under Chapter IVA of the Act. These
anomalies may also defeat the very legislative intent to   H
      11 '70   SUPREME COURT REPORTS               (2011] 3 S.C.R.

A provide a progressive form of land acquisition when
  compared to the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894
  and, therefore, require the attention of law makers. [Para
  12) [1184-E]

B     . Satendra Prasad Jain vs. State of U.P.1993 (4) SCC 369
     Awadh Bihari Yadav vs. State of Bihar 1995 (6) SCC 31 UP
     Jal Nigam, Lucknow vs. Katra Properties (P) Ltd. 1996 (3) SCC
     124 Allahabad Development Authority vs. Nasiruzzaman
     1996 (6) SCC 424; Ginnar Traders (3) vs. State of
     Maharashtra 2011 (3) SCC 1 - relied on.
c
                           Case Law Reference:
          1993 (4) sec 369           relied on            Para 12
          1995 (6) sec 31            relied on            Para 12
D
          1996 (3) sec 124           relied on            Para 12
          1996 (6) sec 424           relied on           Para 12
          2011 (3) sec 1             relied on           Para 12
E        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No.
     2794 of 2011.
         From the Judgment & Order dated 12.5.2010 of the High
     Court of Judicature at Allahabad in WP (C) No. 14945 of 2010.
F
           Gopal Subramanium, SG, Atul Chitale, Suchitra Atul
    , Chitale, Sunaina Dutta, Nishtha Kumar, Snigdha Pandey for the
      Appellant.
       S.B. Upadhyay, Aftab Sharma, Deep Kumar Sharma and
G Aftab Ali Khan for the Resp!)ndents.,
          The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
          R.V.RAVEENDRAN, J. 1. Leave granted.
H
 DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION 1171
OF INDIA v. SUBODH SINGH [R.V. RAVEENDRAN, J.]
      2. The first· respondent was the owner of lands bearing A
Gata Nos.106, 118, 119, 123, 126 and 145 in village Kakrahi,
District Auraiya, Uttar Pradesh. The said lands, among others,
were acquired for a special railway project, that is, the
Dedicated Freight Corridor at Kanpur (Rural), Auraiya and
Etava Dist;·;cts. The acquisition was under chapter IVA of the · e
Railways Act, 1989 ('Act' for short) which dealt with land
.,,~qu1:.;iions for special railway projects. A notification dated
10.6.2008 (gazetted on 10.6.2008) under section 20A{1) of the
Act was published by the Central Government declaring its
intention to acquire lands in question for execution of a special c
railway project. This was followed by a declaration dated
12.12.2008 (gazetted on 16.12.2008) under section 20E(1) of
the Act declaring that the lands mentioned therein should be
acquired for the purpose mentioned in the notification under
section 20A( 1) of the Act. On such declaration, the land vested D
absolutely in the Central Government free from encumbrances,
in view of the vesting provision in section 20E(2) of the Act. A
public notice referring to the notifications dated 10.6.2008 and
 12.2.2008 under section 20A(1) and 20E(1) of the Act and
inviting claims from all persons interested in the lands was
published by the competent authority in two newspapers (Amar E
 Ujala and Dainik Jagran) dated 20.2.2009. Thereafter an order
dated 8.2.2010 was made by the competent authority
determining the compensation payable,· under section 20F(1)
of the Act.
                                                                   F
      3. The first respondent filed W.P.No.14945/2010 for
quashing the award dated 8.2.2010 and for a declaration that
the entire acquisition proceedings stood lapsed under section
20F(2) of the Act, as the award was not made within one year
from the date of publication of the date of declaration dated G
12.12.2008. A Division bench of the High Court allowed the said
writ petition by the impugned order dated 12.5.2010. It quashed
the award dated 8.2.2010 and declared that the acquisition
proceedings stood lapsed. The said decision was based on
the following findings recorded by the division bench :            H
        1172         SUPREME COURT REPORTS                (2011] 3 S.C.R.


    A          (a)     The award was made beyond one year from the
                       date of publication of the declaration under seGtion
                       20E(1) of the Act.                              ·
               (b)    The benefit of the first proviso to section 20F(2) of
                      the Act which enabled the competent authority to
    B
                      make the award within an extended period of six
                      months (after the expiry of one year specified in
                      section 20F(2) of the Act) was not available to save
                      the acquisition, as the competent authority failed to
                      record in writing any reason to show that he was
    c                 satisfied that the delay was caused due to
                      unavoidable circumstances.
        Q.uestions for consideration

    D      4. Feeling aggrieved the appellant has filed this appeal.
      The appellant contends that the award was validly made within
      one year from the date qf declaration under section 20E(1) of
      the Act, as it was made within one year from 20.2.2009, the
      date on which public notice of the said notification dated
      12.12.2008 was published in the newspapers. According to the
    E
      appellant, where the publication is made in the official gazette
      and the newspapers, the last of the dates of such publication
      shall be the date of publication of the declaration. It is
      alternatively contended that as the award was made within 18
      months of the date of publication of the declaration, the
    F acquisition did not lapse. On the contentions urged the following
      questions arise for consideration :
               (i)     Whether the period of one year, stipulated under
                       section 20F(2) of the Act, for making the award,
    G                  has to be reckoned from the date of publication of
                       the declaration under section 20E(1) of the Act in
'                    . the official gazette or from the date of any
                       subsequent publication of the declaration in-
                       newspapers?
    H
- DEOICATED'FREIGfft CORRIDOR CORPORATION 1173
OF INDIA v. SUBODH SINGH [R.V. RAVEENDRAN, J.]

     (ii)   •Whether an award made within six months after the        A
             expiry of one year from the date of publication of
             the declaration, is valid under the first proviso to
             section 20F(2) of the Act, even if reasons are not
             recorded by the competent authority in writing to
             show that he was satisfied that the delay had been       B
             caused due to unavoidable circumstances?

The relevant legal provisions

     5. A reference to the relevant provisions will be necessary
to provide answers to these questions. Chapter IVA was C
inserted in the Act by Amendment Act 11 of 2008 with effect
from 31.1.2008. The said chapter is a self contained code in
regard to land acquisitions for special railway projects.
      5.1) Sub-section 20A relates to power to acquire land           0
           and reads thus :
    "20A. Power to acquire lafld, etc.: (1) Where the Centr~t
    Government is satisfied that for a public purpose any land
    is required for execution of a special railway project, it may,
    by notification, declare its intention to acquire such land.      E
    (2) Every notification under sub-section (1), shall give a
    brief description of the land and of the special railway
    project for which the land is intended to be acquired.
                                                                      F
    (3) The State Government or the Union Territory, as the
    case may be, shall for the purposes of this section, provide
    the details of the land records to the competent authority,
    whenever required.
    (4) The competent authority shall cause the substance of G
    the notification to be published. in two local newspapers,
    one of which shall be in avernacular language.
     5.2. "Special railway project" is defined in section 2(37A)
of the Act and means a project, notified as such by the central       H
    1174     SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  (2011) 3 S.C.R.

A government from time to time, for providing national
  infrastructure for a public purpose in a specified time-frame,
  covering one or more states or the union territories. Clauses
  (7A) and (26) of section 2 of the Act define "competent authority"
  and notification as under :
B
       "2(7A). 'competent authority' means any person authorized
       by the Central Government, by notification, to perform the
       functions of the competent authority for such area as may
       be specified in the notification.
c       2(26). 'notification' means a notification published in the
        Official Gazette."
       5.3. Section 208 deals with power to enter for survey etc.
  Section 20C relates to evaluation of damages during survey,
0 measurement      etc. Section 200 provides for hearing of
  objections to the acquisition.
         5.4. Section 20E deals with declaration of acquisition and
    the same is extracted below :

E       "20£. Declaration of acquisition : (1) Where no objection
        under subs-section (1) of section 200 has been made to
        the competent authority within the period specified therein
        or where the competent authority has disallowed the
        objections under sub-section (2) of that section, the
F       competent authority shall, as soon as may be, submit a
        report accordingly to the Central Government and on
        receipt of such report, the Central Government shall
        declare, by notification, that the land should be acquired
        for the purpose mentioned in sub-section (1) of section
G       20A.
        (2) On the publication of the declaration under sub-section
        (1 ), the land shall vest absolutely in the Central Government
        free from all encumbrances.

H
 DEDICATED FRE=J,GHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION 1175
OF INDIA v. SUBODH SINGH [R.V. RAVEENDRAN, J.]

   (3) Where in respect of any land, a notification has been        A
   published under sub-section (1) of section 20A for its
   acquisition, but no declaration under sub-section (1) of this
   section has been published within a period of one year
   from the date of publication of that notification, the said
   notification shall cee!se to have any effect :                   s
   Provided that in computing the said period of one year,
   the period during which any action or proceedings to be
   taken in pursuance of the notification issued under sub-
   section (1) of section 20A is stayed by an order of a court      C
   shall be excluded.

   (4) A declaration made by the Central Government under
   sub- section (1) shall not be called in question in any court
   or by any other authority."
                                                                    D
    5.5. Section 20F deals with determination of amount
  . payable as compensation. Sub-sections 1, 2 and 4 which
    are relevant for our purpose are extracted below :
   "20F. Determination of amount payable at compensation
   - (1) Where any land is acquired under this Act, there shall     E-
   be paid an amount which shall be determined by an order
   of the competent authority.

   (2) The competent authority shall make an award under this
   section within a period of one year from the date of the         F
   publication of the declaration and if no award is made
   within that period, the entire proceedings for the acquisition
   of the land shall lapse :
   Provided that the competent authority may, after the expiry
   of the period of limitation, if he is satisfied that the delay   G
   has been caused due to unavoidable cirr.umstances, and
   for the reasons to be recorded in writing, he may make
   the award within an extended period of six months.
   Provided further that where an award is made within the          H
    1176       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                 [2011] 3 S.C.R.

A        extended period, the entitled person shall, in the interest
         of justice, be paid an additional compensation for the delay
         in making of the award, every month for the period so
         extended, at the rate of not less than five per cent of the
         value of the award, for each month of such delay.
B
         xxx    xxx                    xxx
         (4) Before proceeding to determine the amount under sub-
         section (1) or sub-section (3), as the case may be, the
         competent authority shall give a public notice published in
C        two local newspapers, one of which shall be in a vernacular
         language inviting claims from all persons interested in the
         land to be acquired.·

         xxx    xxx                    xxx
D Re : Question (i)

          6. Sub-section (1) of section 20E of the Act provides that
    the central government shall, on receipt of the report of the
    competent authority, declare by notification that the land should
E   be acquired for the purpose mentioned in section 20A(1 ). Sub-
    section (2) of section 20E of the Act provides that on the
    publication of such declaration by notification, by the central
    government, under sub-section (1), the lands shall vest
    absolutely in the central government free from all
F   encumbrances. Clause (26) of section 2 defines "notification"
    as a notification published in the official gazette. Section 20E
    thus requires the notification to be published only in the official
    gazette. The section does not require the notification of
    declaration to be published in any newspaper or by any other
G   mode. By way of contrast, we ·may refer to section 20A(4)
    relating to preliminary notification and 20F(4) relating to public
    notice inviting claims before making the award of the Act.
    Section 20A(4) requires that in addition to publication of a
    notification by the central government, of the declaration of its
H   intention to acquire any land, tne competent authority shall
 DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION 1177
OF iNDIA v. SUBODH SINGH [R.V. RAVEENDRAN, J.)
  cause the substance of the notification to be published in two A
 'local° newspapers one of which will be in a vernacular language.
'Section 20F(4) of the Act requires that before proceeding to
  determine the compensation, the competent authority shall give
  a public notice in two local newspapers inviting claims.
 Wherever newspaper publication is required, it has been B
  specifically provided by the legislature. The absence of a similar
  provision in section 20E for publication in newspapers, makes
  it clear that the ·publication of the declaration under section
  20E(1) is complete when it is published in the official gazette.
  The publication of the notification under section 20E(1 ), or its c
  substance, in any. newspaper, is not therefore a requirement .
  under the Act. Even if it is published in any newspaper, such
  publication will be only for general information and will not serve
  any purpose under the Act.
      7. The appellant submits that a public notice under section D
20F(4) of the Act was published in two.newspapers on
20.2.2009 notifying t~ public about the· declaration under
section 20E(1) and inviting claims from persons interested and
consequently, the period of one year should be reckoned from
20.2.2009 and not from 1.6.12.2008 (date on which the E
notification was .gazetted). According to appellant, if the date
of publication in the newspapers (20.2.2009) is taken into
account; the award made on 8.2.2010 would satisfy the
requirement of making the award within one year stipulated in
section 20F(2) of the Act. We find no merit in this contention. F
The public notice dated 20.2.2009 published in the newspapers
was not a publication of the notification of declaration under
section 20E(1) of the Act, but a public notice required to be
issued under sub-section (4) of section 20F by the competent
authority inviting claims, after the publication of a notification G
under Section 20E(1) of the Act. Even if the pubtic notice in the
newspapers dated 20.2.2009, is to be regarded as .publication
of the declaration under section 20E(1) of the Act, it would not
be of any relevance to calculate the period of one year under
section 20F(2) of the Act. As noticed above what is relevant H
    1178    SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2011] 3 S.C.R.

A for the purpose of reckoning the period of one year is the date
  of publication of notification of declaration under section 20E(1)
  of the Act: in the official gazette and nothing else.
    Re : question (Ii))

B      8. Sub-section {2) of section 20F of the Act requires the
  competent authority to make an award within a period of one
  year from the date of publication of the declaration and provides
  that if no award is made within that period, the entire
  proceedings for acquisition of land shall lapse. The term
C "publication" in section 20F(2) refers to publication of the
  declaration in the official gazette. In this case, the declaration
  under section 20E(1) was made by a notification dated
  12.12.2008 which was published in the official gazette on
  16.12.2008. Therefore the award ought to have been made
D within one year from 16.12.2008. The award made on
  8.2.2010, was clearly beyond one year from the date of
  publication of the declaration. If the benefit of additional period
  of six months under the first proviso to section 20F(2) is taken,
  the award made on 8.2.2010 would be in time and the
E acquisition proceedings would not lapse. The question is
  whether it is permissible to do so on the facts of this case.
        9. Though sub-section (2) of section 20F provides that if
   the award is not made by the competent authority within one
F year from the date of publication of the declaration, the entire
   proceedings for acquisition of land shall lapse, the proviso
   thereto enables the competent authority to make the award
   within an extended period of six months if he is satisfied that
 · the delay had been caused due to unavoidable circumstances
   and reasons therefor are recorded in writing. In this case
G admittedly the competent authority has not recorded any
   reasons in writing to hold that the delay was due to unavoidable
   circumstances.
      10. In view of the inconsistencies and ambiguities in section
H 20F of the Act, (enumerated in para 12 below), it becomes
 DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION 1179
OF INDIA v. SUBODH SINGH [R.V. RAVEENDRAN, J.]
necessary to read the provisions of the section harmoaiously.          A
The effect of such harmonious reading will be as under :
        (a)   The award has to be made within one year from the
              date of publication of the declaration.
        (b)   If the competent authority is satisfied that the award   B
              could not be made within a period of one year due
              to unavoidable circumstances, which are to be
              recorded in writing, he could make the award within
              eighteen months .. The requirement regarding
              recording of reasons is not mandatory.                   c
        (c)   The acquisition proceedings will stand eclipsed at
              the end of one year from the date of publication if
              no award is made within one year. If no award is
              made within eighteen months, the proceedings for
                                                                       D
              acquisitions would lapse.
        (d)   If the award is made within eighteen months, the
   '.         acquisition will emerge out of the eclipse and will
              not lapse. But additional compensation will become
              payable for the period beyond one year, as               E
              provided in the second proviso to section 20F(2).
              If the reasons are not recorded or if the reasons are
              not satisfactory, the additional compensation under
              the second proviso can be at a rate higher than the
              minimum of 5% per month stipulated in the second         F
              proviso to section 20F(2).
      11. The award dated 8.2.201 O by the coryipeteot authority
proceeds on the basis that the notification of declaration under
section 20E(1) of the Act has to be published not only in tlie
official gazette, but also in the form of a public notice in two G
newspapers and that the latter of the two dates of publication
would be the date of commencement of the period of one year,
under section 20F(2) of the Act. This is evident from the
following observations in the said award dated 8.2.201 Oof the
competent authority:                                             H
    1180    SUPREME COURT REPORTS                    [2011] 3 S.C.R.


A       "Thereafter, the proposal for the isStJance of the notification
        for the acquisition of tand under section 20E of Indian
        Railways Act and report of the competent officer has been
        presented before the Central Government. The Central
        Government issued notification through Gazette No.
B       Ka.Aa.2903 {A) dated 12.12.2008 for the acquisition 9f
        total 1.2180 hectare land in village Kakahari. The
        publication of above mentioned notifica"tion has been
        issued in two daily newspapers Amar Ujjala and Dainik
        Jagran under the amended provisions of section 20E(4)
c       of the Indian Railways Act 1989 on 20.2.2009."
                                               (emphasis supplied)
   It is evident from the award that the competent authority
   proceeded under the bona fide impression that publication of
o the public notice under ~ection 20F(4) in the·two newspapers
   (Amar Uja/a and Dainik Jagran) on 20.2.2009 referring to the
   declaration under section 20E{1), subsequent to the date of
   gazette publication (16.12.2008) is also part of the process of
   publication of the declaration under section 20E(1 ). As a
E consequence, he applied the principle that when publication is
   required to be made by more than one mode, the date of
   publication by the last of the prescribed modes is the date of
   publication. He therefore assumed that the date of publication
   of the public notice in the two newspapers dated 20.2.2009 to
F be the date of publication of declaration for the purposes of
   section 20E(1) and 20F{2) of the Act and that consequently the
   award was made within one year from such date. On the facts
   of the case and on a harmonious reading of the provision of
   section 20F of the Act, the aforesaid reasoning in the award
   can be treated as the reason for the delay in making the award.
G .The acquisition did not, therefore, lapse. However, having
   regard to the second proviso to section 20F(2), the land owners
   (described as "entitled persons") will be entitled to additional
   compensation for the delay in making of the award at a rate
   not less than 5% of the value of the award for each month of
H
   DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION 1181
. OF INDIA v. SUBODH SINGH [R.V. RAVEENDRAN,·J.] ~

·cielay.                                                            A
      .                              .
'certain anomalies.in the provisjons of Chapter VIA of
                                                    2
                                                        the ·
 Act      . ..                                        •


      12. Before parUl1g we may refer to several apparent
 anomalies noticed ib Chapter IVA of the Act,· in particular tn B
 section 20F, which requites the attention-of the law makers. As
 neither the validity of Chapter.VIA of the Act nor the, validity of
 any provision therein is under challenge in this appeal, but as
 we have faced difficulties in the application of section 20F, we
 are referring to some of the anomalies in the provisions of c
 Chapter IVA, without pronouncing upo,n ·the. validity of the .
 provision.                                            .      .
       (i) Sub-section (2) of section 20F provides that if.no award
  is made within one year from the date of publication·of the
· declaration, the entire proceedings for\ the acquisition shall D
  lapse. The first proviso to sub-section 't.2) provides that the
  competent authority may, after the expiry\Of the period of one
  year, if he is satisfied that the delay has been caused "due ~o
  unavoidable circumstances and for reasons to be recorded in
  writing, make an award within an extended period of six · E
  months. This means that when an award is not made within one
  year from the date of publication of the declaration, the
  proceedings for acquisition would lapse, but if within six months
  of such lapsing, the competent authority makes an award after
  recording reasons for the delay, what stood lapsed would stand F
  revived. But if the acquisition proceedings had already lapsed
  at the end of one year, mere making of an award thereafter
  cannot revive the acquisition proceedings, in the absence of
  any provision in the Act providing for revival of the lapsed
   acquisition. .                                                   G
      (ii) Sul:. :Jction (2) of section 20F requires the award to
 be made by the competent authority and the first proviso
 requires the competent authority to record the reasons for the
 delay. What are "unavoidable circumstances" leading to the
 delay which would enable the competent authority to make an        H
    1182     SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2011) 3 S.C.R.

A award beyond one year, would invariably lead to litigations as
  to whether there were unavoidable circumstances, whenever
  the award is made beyond one year. As the consequence of
  making an award beyond one year but within eighteen months,
  involving payment of additional compensation, is set out in the
s second proviso to section 20F(2), there is no need for requiring
  the cvmpetent authority to record reasons in writing showing
  that the delay was due to unavoidable circumstances.
       (ii.i) The second proviso to section 20F(2) requires
  payment of additional compensation for the delay in making of
C the award, at the rate of not less than five percent of the value
  of the award, for each month of delay. This vests unguided
  discretion in the competent authority or the Arbitrator to award
  additional compensation at any higher rate and gives routn for
  unnecessary litigation at the instance of "entitle .. persons"
D claiming higher percentages as additional compensation. It is
  necessary to consider whether specifying a fixed monthly rate
  of increase would serve the ends of justice better instead of
  indicating a minimum rate per month.
E       (iv) Sub-section (1) of section 20F refers to an "ordet' of
  the competent authority determining the amount to be paid for
  the land acquired. Sub-section (2) refers to the competent
  authority making an "award'. It is not clear whether the award
  by the competent authority is consequential to the order that is
  made under sub-section (1) of section 20F or whether the order
F under sub-section (1) is itself the award referred to in sub-
  section (2) of section 20F. Confusion can be avoided by using
  only one of the words -'order' or 'award' - to refer to the decision
  of the competent authority determining compensation, at all
  places.
G
        (v) Sub-section (4) of section 20F provides that before
  detem1ining the amount under sub-section (1) or sub-section
  (3), the competent authority shall give a public notice inviting
  claims from all persons interested in land to be acquired. The
H issue of such public notice under section 20F(4) is aft~r the
·DEDICATED FREIGHT CORRIDOR CORPORATION 1183
OF INDIA v. SUBODH SINGH [R.V. RAVEENDRAN, J.]
publication of notification of declaration under section 20E(1).    A
Sub- section (2) of section 20E provides that on publication of
the declaration, the land vests in the central government. If the
land has already vested in the government on publication of
the declaration under section 20E(1), the question of issuing a
public notice thereafter, inviting claims under section 20F(4)      s
from persons interested in the lands "to be acquired" does not
arise. The words "to be acquired" may have to be replaced by
the words "acquired".                  ·
     (vi) If the land has already vested absolutely in the Central
Government on publication of declaration of acquisition in the C
Official Gazette under section 20E(1 ), it is not clear how the
proceedings for acquisition could lapse if the award is not
made within one year or even 18 months, This Court while
dealing with other enactments relating to acquisition has held
that acquisition would not lapse as consequence of not making D
the award within the specified time, if the Jand had already
vested in the government and the Act does not provide for re-
vesting in the land owner. [See : Satendra.Prasad Jain vs.
State of U.P. - 1993 (4) SCC 369, Awadh Bihari Yadav vs.
 State of Bihar - 1995 (6) SCC 31, UP Jal Nigam, Lucknow E
VS. Katra Properties (P) Ltd. - 1996 (3) sec 124, Allahabad
Development Authority vs. Nasiruzzaman - 1996 (6) SCC 424
and Ginnar Traders (3) vs. State of Maharashtra - 2011 (3)
sec 11.               ·
      (vii) Section 20 I of the Act provides that though the land F
vests in the central government on publication of the declaration
under section 20E(1), the competent authority can demand the
surrender or delivery of possession only after the
compensation is determined under section 20F and is ·
deposited under section 20 H. However section 20 J provides G ·
that orv·f!:! the land vests in the central government on publication
of a declaration under section 20E(2), it shall be lawful for any
persons authorized by the central government "to enter and do
other act necessary upon the land for carrying out the building,
maintem;mce,. manc~gement or ({"".;ration of the special railway H
    1184     SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2011] 3 S.C.R. ·


A project or part thereof or any work connected therewith". In
  other words section 20-J enables the central government to
  enter upon possession of the land on publication of the
  declaration under section 20E, even before the award made,Is
  and carry on the activities connected with the special railway
a project for which the land was acquired. The provisions of
  section 20-J apart from being badly worded, are contrary· to
  provisions of section 20-1. Section 20 J would lead to
  deprivation of possession of the land to the land owner without
  even determining or offering any compensation. This requires
C to be examined and corrected. Further, there is no indication
  as to what should happen if the central government or person
  authorized by it starts f!xecuting the special railway projE.::t in
  the acquired land under section 20 J and thereafter, th,,
  acquisiti<>n lapses on account of the award not being made
  within the time frame mentioned in section 20F(2).
0
       We have referred to these anomalies as they are likely to
  give room for considerable avoiqable litigation, in regard to
  acquisitions under Chapter IVA of the Act. These anomalies
  may also defeat the very legislative intent to provide a
E progressive form of land acquisition when compared to the
  provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Be that as it may.
    Conclusion
       13. In view of our finding that the acquisition has not lapsed,
F we allow this appeal, set aside the judgment of the High Court,
  and dismiss the challenge to the acquisition. It is however made
  clear that in view of the delay in making the award beyond one
  year, the first respondent shall be entitled to additional
  compensation as provided under the second proviso to section
G 20F(2) of the Act. Parties to bear their respective costs.
          14. The Registry is directed to send copies of this order
    .to the Law Commission of India and Ministry of Railways.

    D.G.                                            Appeal allowed.