Jai Dutt vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr
2015 Latest Caselaw 8273 Del

$~52

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                             Judgment delivered on: 02.11.2015

W.P.(C) 9119/2014

JAI DUTT                                                          ..... Petitioner

                             versus


GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR                                      ..... Respondents

Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Petitioner    : Mr Rahul Sharma, Advocate
For the Respondents    : Mr Yeeshu Jain and Ms Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for L&B/LAC
                        Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal, Advocate for DDA


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

                                 JUDGMENT

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL)

1. The counter affidavit handed over by Mr Yeeshu Jain on behalf of

LAC is taken on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not

wish to file the rejoinder affidavit as he is relying on the averments already

made in the writ petition.

2. 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. 4/1999-2000 dated 22.07.1999 was

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

58/9(2-14), 12/1(1-11), 13/1(0-10) and 13/2(2-00) measuring 6 bighas and

15 biswas in village Khera Khurd, Delhi, shall be deemed to have lapsed.

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. The writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. There shall be no

order as to costs.

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J NOVEMBER 02, 2015 rs