Charan Singh & Anr. vs Union Of India And Anr
2014 Latest Caselaw 6782 Del

$~      27 (Category-I)

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                   Judgment delivered on: 15th December 2014

W.P.(C) 6073/2014 & CM No.14779/2014

CHARAN SINGH & ANR.                                                ..... Petitioners



                             versus



UNION OF INDIA AND ANR                                            ..... Respondents

Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner  : Mr Deepak Khosla, Advocate.

For the Respondents   : Mr Yeeshu Jain with Ms Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for L&B/LAC
                        Mr Pawan Mathur, Advocate for DDA.


CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE INDER SINGH MEHTA

                                 JUDGMENT

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL)

1. The learned counsel for the respondent no.1 has handed over the

counter affidavit. The same is taken on record. The learned counsel for the

petitioner does not wish to file any rejoinder affidavit and states that he shall

rely on the averments made in the writ petition itself.

2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners are seeking the benefit of

section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land

Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred

to as 'the 2013 Act') which came into effect on 01.01.2014. The petitioners,

consequently, seek a declaration that the acquisition proceeding initiated

under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1894

Act') and in respect of which Award No.102-A/1980-81 dated 13.11.1981

was made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioners' land comprised in Khasra

No. 228/2 (New Khasra No. 362) measuring 1 bigha 9 biswas in Village

Mandoli, Delhi shall be deemed to have lapsed.

3. It is an admitted position that neither physical possession of the

subject lands has been taken by the land acquiring agency, nor has any

compensation been paid to the petitioners. The award was made more than

five years prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act. All the ingredients of

section 24(2) of the 2013 Act as interpreted by the Supreme Court and this

Court in the following decisions stand satisfied:-

(i) Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr v.

Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors: (2014) 3 SCC 183;

(ii) Union of India and Ors v. Shiv Raj and Ors:

(2014) 6 SCC 564;

(iii) Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Association v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors: Civil Appeal No. 8700/2013 decided on 10.09.2014;

(iv) Surender Singh vs. Union of India and Ors.:

W.P.(C) 2294/2014 decided 12.09.2014 by this Court.

4. As a result the petitioners are entitled to a declaration that the said

acquisition proceedings initiated under the 1894 Act in respect of the subject

lands are deemed to have lapsed. It is so declared.

5. The writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. There shall be no

order as to costs.

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J

INDER SINGH MEHTA, J DECEMBER 15, 2014 ab