Rathi Steels Ltd (Formerly Rathi ... vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors.
2015 Latest Caselaw 4725 Del

$~24
         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                               Judgment delivered on: 06.07.2015
+ W.P.(C) 9177/2014

RATHI STEELS LTD
(FORMERLY RATHI MINI STEELS LTD)                                  ... Petitioner
                 versus

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.                                      ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Petitioner                     : Mr Dinesh Kumar Garg with Mr Deepak Mishra
For the Respondent L&B/LAC             : Mr Sanjay Kumar Pathak with Mr Sunil K. Jha
For the Respondent DDA                 : Mr Arjun Pant

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                                 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.2/2007-08 was made on 20.08.2007 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 Masoodabad, New Delhi, in Khasra No.340 (4-10), 341 (4-16), 342 (4-16) and 343/1 (3-15) measuring 17 bighas17 biswas in all.

2. Admittedly, though physical possession of the subject land has been taken on 02.11.2006, 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

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J JULY 06, 2015 kb