Khazani & Ors vs The Honorable Lt. Governor Raj ...
2014 Latest Caselaw 7137 Del

$~      17

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                 Judgment delivered on: 23.12.2014
W.P.(C) 6587/2014 & CM 15743/2014

KHAZANI & ORS                                                         ..... Petitioners

                              versus

THE HONORABLE LT. GOVERNOR RAJ BHAWAN, DELHI &
ORS.                                ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Petitioner                     : Mr N. Prabhakar
For the Respondent Nos. 2&4            : Mr Yeeshu Jain with Ms Jyoti Tyagi
For the Respondent No.3                : Ms Mrinalini S. Gupta with Ms Mrinmoi Chatterjee



CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE I.S. MEHTA

                                 JUDGMENT

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL)

1. The counter affidavit handed over on behalf of respondent nos. 2&4 is

taken on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to file

any rejoinder affidavit as he would be relying on the averments made in the

writ petition.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners states that this matter is

covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Girish Chhabra vs. Lt.

Governor of Delhi and Ors.: W.P.(C) 2759/2011 decided on 12.09.2014.

He states that although possession of the subject land has been taken, the

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

1894 Act') was made more than five years prior to the commencement 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. In this case Award

No.80E/1970-71 was made on 09.01.1981. He also states that compensation

has not yet been paid to the petitioner. Therefore, the requirements of

section 24(2) of the 2013 Act have been fulfilled and the petitioner is entitled

to a declaration that the subject acquisition under the 1894 Act has lapsed.

The land in question is situated in village Mehrauli in khasra nos. 2528/1229

min (4-10) 1/4th share, 2528/1229 (8-01) 1/4th share, 1223 min (6-10) 1/4th

share, 2534/1174/1 (1-0) ½ share measuring 19 bighas 1 biswas in all.

3. Admittedly, though physical possession of the subject land has been

taken on 23.09.1981, compensation has not been paid to the petitioner. The

Award is also more than five years prior to the commencement of the 2013

Act. Consequently, the decision of this Court in Girish Chhabra (supra)

applies on all fours and the subject acquisition has lapsed.

4. The writ petition is allowed by declaring that the acquisition in respect

of the subject land has lapsed. There shall be no order as to costs.

                                  BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J




DECEMBER 23, 2014                           I.S. MEHTA
kb