Vasant Kunj Enclave Housing ... vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors.
2005 Latest Caselaw 411 Del

ORDER

1. Today, we have disposed of the above 25 writ petitions by separate judgments. There is unanimity of view and conclusions in regard to the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners except in relation to ground no.5 noticed in the judgment of Madan B. Lokur, J., dealing with the contention that there was no reason for invoking the provisions of Section 17(1) and 17(4) of the Act, in respect of the acquisition of the land in question. Even on this point, as far as invoking the provisions of Section 17(1) of the Act is concerned, there is no difference of opinion, however, there is a divergent view expressed by us that 'there was no application of mind to the provisions of section 17(4) of the Act by the competent authority'. That is in substance the short controversy which falls in the domain of difference of opinion.

2. Thus, it would be in the interest of justice that the matter is referred to a third Hon'ble Judge limited to that extent, in terms of the Delhi High Court Rules and practice of this Court.

3. The cases be placed before Hon'ble the Chief Justice for appropriate orders. We may also mention here that it will be in the interest of justice to have these matters disposed of expeditiously as number of other writ petitions are also pending in which the same question of law arises for consideration, on similar facts and they relate to the same notifications.