Jagbir Singh & Ors. vs Union Of India And Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 419 Del

$~25

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                      Judgment delivered on: 24.01.2017

+       W.P.(C) 9164/2014 & CM 20855/2014

JAGBIR SINGH & ORS.                                                 Petitioners

                                       versus



UNION OF INDIA AND ORS                                    ..... Respondents

Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Petitioners          : Mr Manoj Joshi
For the Respondents LAC      : Mr Yeeshu Jain with Ms Jyoti Tyagi
For the Respondent DDA       : Mr Dhanesh Relan with Ms Isha Garg


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

                                 JUDGMENT

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL)

1. By way of this writ petition the petitioners seek 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.4/2006-07 dated 20.10.2006 was

made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioners' land comprised in khasra nos.

27/2//20 min (3-12) measuring 3 bighas 12 biswas in all in village Pooth

Kalan, Delhi, shall be deemed to have lapsed.

2. It is an admitted position that neither physical possession of the

subject land has been taken by the land acquiring agency, nor has any

compensation been paid to the petitioners. 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.

3. 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

lands are deemed to have lapsed. It is so declared.

4. We had impleaded the Gaon Sabha as respondent no.4 and notice was

also issued to the newly added respondent no.4. Despite service of notice

nobody entered appearance on behalf of respondent no.4. In any event, if

there is any dispute regarding title between the petitioner and the Gaon

Sabha that has to be sorted out before another forum. Insofar as the present

acquisition is concerned, the same has lapsed.

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

order as to costs.

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J

ASHUTOSH KUMAR J JANUARY 24, 2017 kb