Praveen Khurana vs Uoi And Ors.
2014 Latest Caselaw 4507 Del

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                               Judgment delivered on: 16.09.2014

W.P.(C) 2827/2014 & CMs 5855-5856/2014
PRAVEEN KHURANA                                                            .....Petitioner
                             versus

UOI AND ORS.                                                            .....Respondents


Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Petitioner    : Mr N.S.Vasisht.

For the Respondents   : Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal for respondent No.3.
                        Mr Sanjay Poddar, Sr. Advocate with Mr Sanjay Kumar Pathak,
                        Mr Yeeshu Jain, Ms Jyoti Tyagi, Mr Sunil Kr. Jha and Ms Kiran Pathak
                        for respondent Nos.4 &5.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL

                                  JUDGMENT

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL)

1. By way of this writ petition the petitioner is 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 petitioner,

consequently, seeks 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.15/1987-88 dated 06.06.1987 was

made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioner's land comprised in Khasra No.

1040 measuring 4 bighas 16 biswas in Village Chattarpur shall be deemed to

have lapsed.

2. 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 petitioner. 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) Surinder Singh vs. Union of India and Ors.:

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

3. As a result the petitioner is 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.

4. The writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. Pending

applications also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J SEPTEMBER 16, 2014/mk