Delhi High Court
Jannat Begum & Ors vs Government Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors on 1 February, 2016
$~39
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 01.02.2016
W.P.(C) 3872/2015
JANNAT BEGUM & ORS ..... Petitioners
versus
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioners : Mr N.S.Dalal
For the Respondent : Mr Siddharth Panda for L&B/LAC
For the DDA : Ms Shobhana Takiar
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL)
W.P.(C) 3872/2015 & CM No.6926/2015(stay)
1. The counter-affidavit handed over by Mr Siddharth Panda, the learned
counsel on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 & 2, is taken on record. The
learned counsel for the petitioners does not wish to file any
rejoinder-affidavit inasmuch as, according to him, all the necessary
averments are contained in the writ petition.
2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners are 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 petitioners,
consequently, seek 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.22/70-71 dated 29.07.1970 was
made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioners' land comprised in Khasra No.
34//3/2 (1-04) (to the extent of 4 biswas only) in village Khureji Khas, shall
be deemed to have lapsed.
3. It is the claim of the petitioners that physical possession of the
4 biswas of land, out of the above-mentioned khasra number, are with the
petitioners, and have not been taken by the land acquiring agencies. It is also
their case that no compensation has been paid to the petitioners. The learned
counsel for the respondents have stated that the said khasra number
comprised of 1 bigha 4 biswas of land, out of that 1 bigha of land, was taken
possession of but the 4 biswas of land could not be taken possession of in
view of the fact that it was built up. The learned counsel for the petitioners
submits that it is this piece of land in respect of which the present writ
petition has been filed. The respondents also contended that compensation
was not paid in respect of these 4 biswas of land as possession had not been
taken. That being the case, coupled with the fact that 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; and
(iv) Surender Singh v. Union of India and Ors.:
W.P.(C) 2294/2014 decided 12.09.2014 by this
Court.
4. As a result, the petitioners are entitled to a declaration that the said
acquisition proceedings initiated under the 1894 Act in respect of the subject
land 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
FEBRUARY 01, 2016/'sn'
