Rajender Prasad vs Lt Governor & Ors
2012 Latest Caselaw 349 Del

*        IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                               Date of decision: 18th January, 2012.

+                               W.P.(C) 3648/2011

%        RAJENDER PRASAD                                          . ..Petitioner
                     Through:               Mr. Rahul Sharma with Ms. Jyoti Dutt
                                            Sharma, Adv.

                                           Versus

         LT GOVERNOR & ORS                                         ..... Respondents
                     Through:               Ms. Shobhna Takiar, Adv. for DDA.
                                            Mr. Arun Birbal, Mr. Vaibhav Mirg, Adv.
                                            for R-3&4.
                                            Dr. Ashwani Bhardwaj with Mr. Jitender
                                            Chopudhary, Adv. for Applicant.
CORAM :-
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
                                      JUDGMENT

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.

1. This petition filed as a Public Interest Litigation (as stated by the counsel for the petitioner on 27th May, 2011) seeks the following reliefs:-

"A. Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order, Direction directing the Respondent to: a. take actual and physical possession of Khasra nos. 76 & 80, situated in Village Gazipur, Delhi - 96 (acquired by award nos.93/ 86-87 & 94/ 86-87), pursuant to Gazette Notification dated 3rd June, 2010 published by the Respondent no.3 herein and as per (i) letters/

communications dated 11th August, 2010, 10th December, 2010, 30th June, 2009 and note dated 29th September, 2009; and (ii) statement on instructions of the learned counsel for the Respondent nos. 1&2 recorded in the order dated 17th January, 2011, passed by this Hon‟ble court in W.P.(C) No. 7541/2010;

b. prevent, stop, discourage and remove the illegal and unauthorized construction which had been carried out and is being carried on by the occupants on the Government land i.e. Khasra nos. 76&80, situated in Village Gazipur, Delhi - 96 (acquired by award nos. 93/86-87 & 94/ 86-87), evenafter the order dated 21.12.2009, passed by this Hon‟ble Court in W.P.(C) No. 14022 of 2009 titled as Rajender Prasad v. The Lt. Governor & Anr., filed by the Petitioner herein and which is clear from the letter dated 27th August, 2010; c. seal the property at Khasra nos.76&80, situated in village Gazipur, Delhi-96;

B. pass any further order(s) which this Hon‟ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice."

It is the case of the petitioner that the aforesaid acquired land had been illegally grabbed and unauthorizedly constructed upon and no action was being taken by the authorities inspite of representations and legal proceedings initiated by the petitioner.

2. The petitioner inspite of averments aforesaid did not implead the persons alleged to have unauthorizedly grabbed the land and unauthorizedly constructed thereon as parties to the petition.

3. Notice of the petition was issued. The persons in occupation of the land applied for impleadment and have filed their counter affidavit claiming title thereto. The respondent no.3 DDA has also filed a counter affidavit pleading that the land is partly acquired and partly un-acquired; that physical possession of the acquired portion also was never handed over by the Land Acquisition Collector to the respondent no.3 DDA due to pendency of writ petition relating to challenge to acquisition; that physical possession could not be handed over also for the reason of the land being only partly acquired; that in the writ petition filed, challenging the acquisition there was an interim order restraining demolition of unauthorized construction; that vide Notification dated 3 rd June, 2010 a part of the land was de-notified; that there is civil litigation before the Civil Court between the petitioner and the persons in occupation; that in view of the said civil proceedings another writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 10524/2006 filed by the petitioner against the respondent no.3 DDA was disposed of; that respondent no.3 DDA was not entitled to take any action with respect to the land owing to the National Capital Territory of Delhi Laws (Special Provisions Act), the land being part of a unauthorized colony under regularization.

4. The counsel for the petitioners seeks adjournment to respond to the aforesaid counter affidavits.

5. We are however of the view that in the light of the pleadings aforesaid in the counter affidavit of the respondent no.3 DDA there is no need to keep the present writ petition pending. The present writ petition, as aforesaid, had been filed as a Public Interest Litigation. The petitioner has brought the issue to the attention of this Court and this Court by issuing notice of the petition and after

having enquired from the concerned authorities is satisfied that no case for invoking the remedy of PIL is made out especially when the petitioner is involved in a private dispute with the alleged wrongdoers.

6. The petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J

ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

JANUARY 18, 2012 „PP‟..