Ram Parkash vs Union Of India & Ors.
2008 Latest Caselaw 2254 Del

*             IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                            WP (C) No. 5517 of 1993

%                                          Decided on : December 15, 2008


Ram Parkash                                                 . . . Appellant

                   through :                   NEMO

              VERSUS

Union of India & Ors.                                       . . . Respondents

                   through :                   Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Advocate


CORAM :-
    THE HON‟BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI
    THE HON‟BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH

       1.     Whether Reporters of Local newspapers may be allowed
              to see the Judgment?
       2.     To be referred to the Reporter or not?
       3.     Whether the Judgment should be reported in the Digest?


A.K. SIKRI, J.         (ORAL)

1. Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner. We have gone through

this petition with the assistance of Mr. Sanjay Poddar, learned

counsel appearing for the respondent.

2. We find that in this writ petition challenge to the notification

acquiring land is laid on the same grounds which were taken in WP

(C) No. 2222/1986, as is clear from para 10 of the writ petition itself

wherein following averments are made :-

"10. That the case of the petitioner is similarly situated as that of Shri Ganeshi Lal in which already the rule has been issued and the interim orders have already been passed by the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in CWP 421/90. Not only this even and an other writ petition in the similar circumstances

bearing civil writ petition No. 2222 of 1986 titled as „Kaptan Singh vs. Union of India‟ is pending disposal in this Hon‟ble court in which also the rule has also been issued by this court."

3. The said writ petition was disposed of by a Division Bench of this

Court vide orders dated 4.2.2005. While upholding the acquisition,

the only direction which was given was that the petitioner would be

at liberty to make representation under Section 48 of the Land

Acquisition Act, 1894 for denotifying the land as agricultural.

4. We dispose of the writ petition giving liberty to the petitioner to

make representation in this behalf within four weeks of receipt of

copy of this order. If the petitioner makes such a representation, the

same shall be considered by the respondents on its own merits and

appropriate orders passed within four weeks thereafter.

(A.K. SIKRI) JUDGE

(MANMOHAN SINGH) JUDGE

December 15, 2008 nsk