The Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, has held that the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority (LARRA) does not have the power or jurisdiction to execute its own awards under the 2013 land acquisition law, as neither the statute nor any Rules confer such power upon the Authority. Justice Jaspreet Singh delivered the judgment in a batch of 45 petitions involving the Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB), UPEIDA, Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) and landowners.
The issue arose from execution proceedings initiated before LARRA after the Authority enhanced compensation in land acquisition references. The requiring bodies challenged LARRA’s jurisdiction to execute its awards, while landowners sought expeditious execution of the amounts awarded to them.
The Court held that LARRA is an adjudicatory Authority constituted under Sections 51 and 64 of the 2013 Act and that its power to adjudicate does not include the power to execute its awards. Such power cannot be exercised under Section 60(3) or assumed as an inherent power. The Court also clarified that the State notification dated August 4, 2022, relied upon in support of LARRA’s execution powers, does not confer any such power upon the Authority under the 2013 Act.
The High Court held that a LARRA award attains the status of a decree and can be executed by the District Court, which would act as the executory arm. While executing the award, the District Court cannot adjudicate its merits, reopen issues or go behind the award. The Court further clarified that Section 47 of the CPC would not apply in a manner that permits such adjudication.
The Court also rejected the contention that Section 63 of the 2013 Act completely bars the Civil Court from dealing with LARRA awards. It held that the bar is confined to matters exclusively cognizable by LARRA under Sections 51 and 64 and does not prevent the District Court from executing a LARRA award.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the petitions filed by SSB, UPEIDA and LDA, set aside LARRA’s orders passed in exercise of its executory powers and directed that LARRA desist from executing its awards, holding such proceedings to be without jurisdiction. The three petitions filed by landowners seeking expeditious execution before LARRA were disposed of.
The Court noted that its conclusion that LARRA cannot execute its awards would impact pending execution cases before LARRA across Uttar Pradesh and may cause inconvenience and uncertainty for award-holders. It observed that, to avoid such inconvenience, the State may consider using its rule-making power to provide power and jurisdiction for execution of LARRA awards with the Authority itself through an integrated mechanism.
