Nihal Singh & Ors. vs Union Of India And Ors
2016 Latest Caselaw 5846 Del

$~13
*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                        Judgment delivered on: 06.09.2016
+       W.P.(C) 3102/2015
NIHAL SINGH & ORS.                                           ..... Petitioners
                                  versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS                                      ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioners : Mr Vipin K.Singh.
For the LAC/L&B     : Mr Siddharth Panda.
For the DDA         : Mr Arjun Pant.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

                               JUDGMENT

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL)

1. The learned counsel for the petitioners state 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.17/1984-85 was

made on 16.07.1985. He also states that compensation has not yet been paid

to the petitioners. Therefore, the requirements of section 24(2) of the 2013

Act have been fulfilled and the petitioners are entitled to a declaration that

the subject acquisition under the 1894 Act has lapsed. The land in question

is to the extent of 1/3rd share of the petitioners comprised in Khasra Nos.

304(17-11), 307/1(2-13), 336(11-10) measuring 33 bighas 14 biswas and full

share in land comprised in Khasra No.324/1 (2-00). The total share of the

petitioner is 10 Bighas and 12 Bishwas in the above lands situated in Village

Lado Sarai.

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

taken on 11.04.1997, 05.05.2003 and 31.12.2013, compensation has not been

paid to the petitioners. 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

ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J SEPTEMBER 06, 2016/ab