JUDGMENT : R.Raghunandan Rao, J. 1. The land of the appellant to an extent of Ac.1.10 cents in Sy. No.208/2, 208/3 and 208/5p of Davuluru Village, Kankipadu Mandal, Krishna District, was acquired under the provisions of th e LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1894 [for short ‘ th e Act, 1894’ ]. A necessary notification under Section 4(1) of the Act, 1894 was issued on 20.06.2013. A declaration under Section 6 of the Act, 1894 was given on 02.01.2014 and an award fixing compensation was passed on 29.12.2015. 2. This acquisition process was challenged by the appellant by way of W.P. No.10516 of 2017 before this Court. The contention of the appellant was that the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 [for short ‘ th e Act, 2013 ] had come into force on 01.01.2014. Section 25 of the Act, 2013 mandated that an award should be passed within twelve months from the date of publication of the declaration under Section 19 of the Act, 2013. Failing which, the entire proceeding for the acquisition of the land shall lapse. However, the first proviso granted power to the Government to extend the said period of twelve months if circumstances justifying the same exist. The appellant contends that the aforesaid period of twelve months expired on 02.01.2015 and no orders of the Government extending time had been passed. Hence, the passing of the award on 29.12.2015 is beyond the said period and consequently, the acquisition proceedings should lapse. 3. A learned single judge of this Court, after considering this contention, dismissed the writ petition by an order dated 24.03.2017. The learned single judge took the view that Section 24 of the Act, 2013, which brought into application the remaining provisions of the Act, 2013, had only stipulated that the new Act would govern the manner of fixation of compensation and consequently, the time frame set out under Section 25 of the Act would not be applicable to the present case and the provisions of Section 11A of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT , 1984 would be applicable. Aggrieved by this order, the present appeal has been filed by the appellant. 4. We have heard Sri O. Manohar Reddy, the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. 5. Aggrieved by this order, the present appeal has been filed by the appellant. 4. We have heard Sri O. Manohar Reddy, the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition. 5. The learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant has taken us to the provisions of Sections 24 and 25 of the Act, 2013 as well as the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Executive Engineer, Gosikhurd Projec t Ambadi, Bhandara, Maharashtra Vidarbha Irrigatio n Development Corporation v. Mahesh and others, (2022) 2 SCC 772 . 6. The learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition has contended that Section 11A of the Act, 1894 granted a period of two years from the date of publication of the declaration under Section 6 for passing of an award. However, this period has been reduced to one year under Section 25 of the Act, 2013. 7. The issue before this Court is whether the reduced period of time would be applicable to the present case or not. It would be necessary to note Sections 24 and Section 25 of the Act, 2013. 24. Land acquisition process under Act No.1 of 1894 shall be deeme d to have lapsed in certain cases. - (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, in any case o f land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Lan d Acquisition Act, 1894 (1 of 1894), - (a) where no award under Section 11 of the said Lan d Acquisition Act has been made, then, all provisions o f this Act relating to the determination of compensatio n shall apply; o r (b) where an award under said section 11 has been made , then such proceedings shall continue under th e provisions of the said LAND ACQUISITION ACT , as if th e said Act has not been repealed . (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), in case o f land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisitio n Act, 1894 (1 of 1894), where an award under the said section 1 1 has been made five years or more prior to the commencement o f this Act but the physical possession of the land has not bee n taken or the compensation has not been paid the said proceeding s shall be deemed to have lapsed and the appropriate Government , if it so chooses, shall initiate the proceedings of such lan d acquisition afresh in accordance with the provisions of this Act : Provided that where an award has been made and compensatio n in respect of a majority of land holdings has not been deposited i n the account of the beneficiaries, then, all beneficiaries specified i n the notification for acquisition under section 4 of the said Lan d Acquisition Act, shall be entitled to compensation in accordanc e with the provisions of this Act . 25. Period within which an award shall be made. - The Collector shall make an award within a period of twelve month s from the date of publication of the declaration under section 19 an d if no award is made within that period, the entire proceedings for th e acquisition of the land shall lapse : Provided that the appropriate Government shall have the power t o extend the period of twelve months if in its opinion, circumstance s exist justifying the same . Provided further that any such decision to extend the period shal l be recorded in writing and the same shall be notified and b e uploaded on the website of the authority concerned . 8. Section 25 of the Act, 2013 stipulates that the Collector shall make an award within twelve months from the date of publication of the declaration under Section 19 . Section 19 of the Act, 2013 corresponds to Section 6 of the Act, 1894. In such circumstances, the period for passing of the award would have to be calculated from the date of declaration under Section 6 of the Act, 1894. 9. Section 24 (1) of the Act, 2013 provides two eventualities. Firstly, where an award has not been passed under Section 11 of the Act, 1894 by the time Act, 2013 has come into force. 9. Section 24 (1) of the Act, 2013 provides two eventualities. Firstly, where an award has not been passed under Section 11 of the Act, 1894 by the time Act, 2013 has come into force. Secondly, where an award has been passed under Section 11 of the Act by the time Act, 2013 has come into force. 10. In the present case, it is an admitted fact that no award has been passed by 01.01.2014 by the Act 2013 come into force. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Executive Engineer referred to supra, considered a similar situation and had held that Section 24 (1)(a) of the Act, 2013 would bring the provisions of Section 25 into the ambit of any acquisition process, where the award had not been passed by 01.01.2014. Paragraph 25 of the said judgment, which sets down this principle, reads as follows: “ 25. Section 25 is a rule of procedure immediatel y following Section 24 and a part of fasciculus o f “all the provisions”, from Sections 25 to 30 , “relating to determination of compensation” . Hence, the expression “all the provisions relatin g to the determination of compensation” under th e 2013 Act will encompass Section 25 of the 201 3 Act .” 11. In view of the authoritative declaration of the law by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it must be held that the award in the present case should have been passed by 01.01.2015. As the award was passed on 29.12.2015, beyond the period stipulated under Section 25 , acquisition proceedings have lapsed. 12. Accordingly, this writ appeal is allowed, setting aside the award passed by the third respondent bearing Rc. B2/537/ 2013 award No.14/2015 dt. 29.12.2015, leaving it open to the respondents to take appropriate steps for initiating fresh acquisition process, if required. No costs. 13. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ appeal shall stand closed.