Manav Mandir Mission Trust vs Government Of National Capital ...
2014 Latest Caselaw 5268 Del

$~8
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                             Judgment delivered on: 27th October, 2014

+            W.P.(C) No.347/2014 & CM No.682/2014 (for stay)

MANAV MANDIR MISSION TRUST                             ..... Petitioner
                Represented by:           Ms.Neelam Rathore,
                                          Advocate.

                        Versus

GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI
& ORS.                                ..... Respondents

                        Represented by:   Ms. Ferida Satarawala,
                                          Advocate for Respondent
                                          Nos. 1, 2,6 and 7.
                                          Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Advocate
                                          for REspondent Nos. 3 and
                                          4.
                                          Mr.Amit Mehra for
                                          Mr. Ajay Verma, Advocate
                                          for Respondent No.5/DDA.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

1. By way of the present petition, the petitioner seeks directions against the respondent Nos. 3 to 7 restraining them from taking possession of and/or demolishing the 'Jain Mandir', admeasuring 3 Bighas 7 Biswas, situated in Khasra No.57, Village Behlolpur Khadar, Ring Road, Opposite Sarai Kale Khan, New Delhi.

2. Ms.Neelam Rathore, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner Trust submits that the petitioner is legal owner of the subject land and has been in continuous and uninterrupted possession of the same since 1987-88. In the year 2010, respondent No.5/Delhi Development Authority (DDA) has come out with the Zonal Development Plan for River Yamuna/ River Front, Zone 'O', which deals with regularization of the religious (including spiritual) institutions subject to fulfilment of certain conditions including the cases that will not be considered for regularization, if located on public/Government land or on land acquired by DDA or on encroached or illegally occupied land.

3. Ms. Rathore further submits that the land in possession of the petitioner Trust is neither a public land nor the petitioner Trust is an illegal and/or unauthorized occupant of the said land.

4. Also submits that Section 24(2) of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the New Act') provides that the land acquisition proceedings are deemed to be lapsed where an award has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of the New Act, but the physical possession of the land has not been taken or the compensation has not been paid.

5. She submits that neither the possession of the land has been taken from the petitioner pursuant to award dated 19.06.1992 nor any compensation has been paid to the petitioner, hence, such acquisition proceedings with respect to the land of the petitioner are deemed to have been lapsed in terms of aforesaid Section 24(2) of the New Act.

6. In the counter-affidavits filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 4 to 6,

it is stated that the petitioner has been claiming its right over the land measuring 3 Bighas 7 Biswas but the petitioner has not placed on record any documents of the registered sale, hence, the petitioner has no right, title or interest in the said land nor it is entitled to file the present writ petition to secure its unauthorized possession, if any. Further stated that land fallen in Khasra No.57, total area 28 Bighas 7 Biswas was notified under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act in Village Behlolpur, in which Mr.Chet Ram and Mr. Pritam, both sons of Mr.Ghanshyam were/are the recorded owners to the extent of 8 Bighas 4 Biswas. Accordingly, after following due procedure of law, an award bearing No.15/1992/93 was passed, which including the total area measuring 28 Bighas 7 Biswas fallen in aforementioned Khasra No.57.

7. Since the entire Khasra No.57 measuring 28 Bighas 7 Biswas was notified and acquired, out of which the compensation for entire 8 Bighas 4 Biswas was duly deposited with the Reference Court on 22.10.2008, which area (8-04) pertained to Mr.Chet Ram and Mr. Pritam from whom the petitioner is alleged to have taken possession without any document of sale/title, therefore, the Competent Authority has the right to recover the possession of land by removing the unauthorized encroachers from the land under reference.

8. The admitted fact is that till date possession of the land in question has not been taken over by the respondents and the issue raised under Section 24(2) of the New Act, is pending adjudication before the Division Bench of this Court. Therefore, no order is required to be passed in this petition.

9. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

petitioner wishes to withdraw the instant petition with liberty to file a fresh petition before the Double Bench of this Court.

10. Accordingly, the instant petition alongwith pending application is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh petition before the appropriate Court within a period of fifteen days from today.

11. Till then, the interim order dated 17.01.2014 shall remain in force.

SURESH KAIT (JUDGE) OCTOBER 27, 2014 sb