Banwari Lal Sharma vs Union Of India And Ors
2014 Latest Caselaw 4508 Del

$~82 (Category II)

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                              Judgment delivered on: 16.09.2014



W.P.(C) 3694/2014 & CM No.7474/2014



BANWARI LAL SHARMA                                         ..... Petitioner

                             versus



UNION OF INDIA AND ORS                                     ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner  : Mr P.S. Bindra, Advocate
For the Respondents : Mr Sanjay Poddar, Sr. Advocate with Mr Siddharth Panda, Mr Yeeshu
                      Jain, Ms Jyoti Tyagi and Mr Anshuman Nayak, Advocates for
                      L&B/LAC
                       Mr Pawan Mathur, Advocate for DDA


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

                                 JUDGMENT

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL)

1. The learned counsel for the petitioner 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.10/87-88 was made

on 14.05.1987. 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 Shayoopur in Khasra No.78/5, 80, 78/4, 91 and 97/6

measuring 8 bighas 16 biswas in all.

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

taken on 14.07.1987, 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.

3. 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

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J SEPTEMBER 16, 2014 dn