Delhi High Court
Jamna Dass & Ors vs Government Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors on 2 November, 2017
$~18, 19, 20, 24, 25, 28, R-39 & R-43
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Judgment: 2nd November, 2017
+ W.P.(C) 5393/2015
JAMNA DASS & ORS ..... Petitioners
Through Mr. Aagney Sail, Adv.
versus
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel
with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Adv. for
L&B/LAC.
Mr. Vikas Sood, Ms. Anusuya Salwan
and Ms. Renuka Arora, Advocates for
DSIIDC.
+ W.P.(C) 5526/2015
DIWAN SINGH & ANR ..... Petitioners
Through Mr. Aagney Sail, Adv.
versus
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel
with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Adv. for
L&B/LAC.
Mr. Vikas Sood, Ms. Anusuya Salwan
and Ms. Renuka Arora, Advocates for
DSIIDC.
+ W.P.(C) 5673/2015
ZILE SINGH & ORS ..... Petitioners
Through Mr. Aagney Sail, Adv.
versus
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents
W.P. (C) No.5393/2015 etc. Page 1 of 10
Through Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel
with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Adv. for
L&B/LAC.
Mr. Vikas Sood, Ms. Anusuya Salwan
and Ms. Renuka Arora, Advocates for
DSIIDC.
+ W.P.(C) 7158/2015
CHAND SINGH & ORS ..... Petitioners
Through Mr. Aagney Sail, Adv.
versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel
with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Adv. for
L&B/LAC.
Mr. Vikas Sood, Ms. Anusuya Salwan
and Ms. Renuka Arora, Advocates for
DSIIDC.
+ W.P.(C) 8573/2015
DINESH MATHUR AND ORS ..... Petitioners
Through Mr.Aagney Sail, Adv.
versus
GNCT OF DELHI AND ORS ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel
with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Adv. for
L&B/LAC.
Mr. Vikas Sood, Ms. Anusuya Salwan
and Ms. Renuka Arora, Advocates for
DSIIDC.
+ W.P.(C) 9367/2015
SURRENDER KUMAR AND ORS ..... Petitioners
Through Mr. Aagney Sail, Adv.
versus
GNCT OF DELHI AND ORS ..... Respondents
W.P. (C) No.5393/2015 etc. Page 2 of 10
Through Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel
with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Adv. for
L&B/LAC.
Mr. Vikas Sood, Ms. Anusuya Salwan
and Ms. Renuka Arora, Advocates for
DSIIDC.
+ W.P.(C) 5383/2015
RAKESH KUMAR & ORS ..... Petitioners
Through Mr. Aagney Sail, Adv.
versus
GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel
with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Adv. for
L&B/LAC.
Mr. Vikas Sood, Ms. Anusuya Salwan
and Ms. Renuka Arora, Advocates for
DSIIDC.
+ W.P.(C) 5450/2015
ANUP @ ANOOP SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Aagney Sail, Adv.
versus
GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents
Through Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel
with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Adv. for
L&B/LAC.
Mr. Vikas Sood, Ms. Anusuya Salwan
and Ms. Renuka Arora, Advocates for
DSIIDC.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO
W.P. (C) No.5393/2015 etc. Page 3 of 10
G.S.SISTANI, J. (ORAL)
1. All the petitioners in these writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India claim 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 „New Act‟). The
lands in respect of which they claim the declaration are located in
Village Karala.
2. The petitions were heard individually, but since common issues arise,
one common judgment has been delivered.
3. The particulars, such as the names of petitioners, the descriptions of the
writ petitions, details of acquired lands(Khasra and other revenue
numbers), pertaining to Village Karala, in a tabulated form, are
extracted as under:
Sl.No. WP.(C) Name of petitioner(s) Khasra Nos. and
No. extent
1. 5393/2015 Jamna S/o Shri Rectangle no.34,
Ram(9/16 share), Khasra nos.17(4-
Mayaram S/o Shri 12), 18(4-12) and
Ram(1/16 share), 19(4-11), Village
Ravinder Kumar S/o Karala
Mahender Singh(1/64
share),
Devender Singh S/o
Mahender Singh(1/64
share)
2. 5526/2015 Diwan Singh S/o Rectangle no.10,
Shiv Lal Singh(1/2 Khasra nos.20(4-
share), 09), 21(4-12),
Baljit Singh S/o Shiv Rectangle no.11,
Lal Singh(1/2 share) Khasra no.41/2(2-
02), 16(4-12),
17(4-16), 18/1(3-
00), 25(4-12)
Rectangle no.16,
Khasra no.5(4-12),
6(4-16), 1(4-09)
and
Rectangle no.17,
Khasra no.10(4-
12), Village Karala
3. 5673/2015 Jile Singh S/o Rectangle no.34,
Hoshyare (1/2 share), Khasra no.10/2(1-
Randhir Singh S/o 00), 14/2(2-14)
Tara Chand(1/4 Rectangle no.34,
share), Khasra no.15/2
Baljeet Singh S/o min(1-14) 16/1(2-
Tara Chand(1/4 04)
share) Rectangle no.39,
Khasra no.6/1
Rectangle no.40,
Khasra no.1/2(4-
04), 10(4-12),
Village Karala
4. 7158/2015 Baljit Singh S/o Risal Rectangle no.34,
Singh, Khasra no.20(5-04)
Chand Singh S/o Rectangle no.35,
Risal Singh, Khasra no.7/1(2-
Pratap Singh S/o 12), 15(4-12),16(4-
Risal Singh, 16), 24(4-16), 25
Jai Prakash S/o Risal (4-16)
Singh (1/6 share Rectangle no.38,
each), Khasra no.4/1(4-
Narender Singh S/o 00), Village
Balbir(1/12 share), Karala.
Virender Singh S/o
Balbir Singh(1/12
share),
Lalit S/o Daya
Chand(1/6 share)
5. 8573/2015 Sandeep Mathur S/o Rectangle no.2,
Ramesh Chand(1/6 Khasra no.22/2(0-
share), 08), 23/2(0-08)
Suresh Kumar S/o Rectangle no.11,
Tara Chand(1/3 Khasra no.2/1(3-
share), 12), 3/1((2-17),
Smt. Sahab Kaur W/o Village Karala
Naresh Kumar (1/3
share),
Dinesh Mathur S/o
Ramesh Chand(1/6
share)
6. 9367/2015 Umrao Singh S/o Rectangle no.33,
Ganeshi (3/8 share), Khasra no.12/2(2-
Ishwar Singh S/o 13),19(4-05), 22(4-
Ganeshi (5/24 share), 05), 2(4-05),
Lakhmi Chand S/o Village Karala
Ganeshi (5/24 share
each),
Surender Kumar S/o
Jai Narayan (5/72
share),
Jaswant Singh S/o Jai
Narayan(5/72 share),
Narender Kumar S/o
Jai Narayan(5/72
share)
7. 5383/2015 Rakesh Kumar S/o Rectangle no.1,
Rameshwar, Khasra no.23/3(2-
Om Prakash S/o 04)
Antram (1/2 share Rectangle no.12,
each) Khasra no.3(4-07),
8/1(3-03), 9(4-15)
Rectangle no.33,
Khasra no.1/2 (0-
19),10(4-09), 11/1
(2-17), Village
Karala
8. 5450/2015 Anup @ Anoop Rectangle no.11,
Singh S/o Shri Surat Khasra no.5(4-16)
Singh Rectangle no.62,
Khasra no.11(4-
16), 12/2(1-15)
19/2(2-5), 20(4-
12), 21(4-16),
Villager Karala
4. Counsel for the petitioners rely on Section 24 (2) of the New Act and
seek a declaration that the acquisition proceedings in respect of their
lands are deemed to have lapsed. It is the case of the petitioners that
although compensation has been paid, but physical possession has not
been taken. Reliance has been placed in the case of Pune Municipal
Corporation & Anr. v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki & ors.,
reported at (2014) 3 SCC 183.
5. The land acquisition proceedings in the aforesaid batch of cases
commenced under the old Land Acquisition Act of 1894(hereinafter
referred to as the „the Act‟. A notification under Section 4 of the Act
was issued on 25.08.2005 for the acquisition of the land for public
purpose, namely, for development of New Industrial Area, admeasuring
1343 bighas and 03 biswas of land in village Kanjhawala; 1774 bighas
and 09 biswas of land in village Sultanpur Dabas; 1905 bighas and 05
biswas of land in village Karala; and 30 bighas and 09 biswas of land in
village Poothkhurd. Thereafter, a declaration under Section 6 of the Act
was made on 10.07.2006 and, ultimately an Award no.3/2008-09 dated
26.05.2008 was passed for the lands in village Karala.
6. The petitioners in this batch of cases had challenged the compensation
which was determined by the Collector by filing a reference petition
under Section 18 of the Act. During the pendency of the reference
petitions, Government floated a Special Rehabilitation Package (SRP)
wherein taking into consideration the general increase in the prices of
the land and the inequity of giving compensation based on the
procedure followed under the 1894 Act, it was decided that with respect
to the land for which the awards were not announced till December,
2007, a special benefit would be given to the people affected.
7. The Special Rehabilitation Package (SRP) reads as under:
"GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI
LAND & BUILDING DEPARTMENT
B-BLOCK: VIKAS BHAWAN: NEW DELHI.
No.F.9(20)/80/L&B/LA/Vol.II/8226-44
Dated: 01-10-2008
ORDER
The government of the NCT of Delhi have taken into
consideration the general increase in prices of land and the
inequity of giving compensation based on the procedure followed
under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Therefore, the
government have decided to give a Special Rehabilitation
Package for the people affected by land acquisition in respect of
the cases in which the land acquisition awards have not been
announced till December 18, 2007, details of which are:-
1. The amount of compensation effective from December 18,
2007 would be discounted by Rupees 11.80 lakhs per acre
per year for those lands which were notified under section 4
for acquisition in 2006 and 2005.
2. Though this Special Rehabilitation Package would involved
additional funds for making payment of compensation to the
farmers, the amount would be recovered while determining
the cost of land allotted to other government agencies.
3. The other elements of the award namely solatium and interest
would be allowed as per rules.
4. The Special Rehabilitation Package would not be treated as
precedent for the future.
5. The payment of compensation should be done in a time
bound manner.
6. The package would apply to all agricultural lands.
7. The Special Rehabilitation Package should be accepted by
individual farmers and made applicable in each case only, if
they do not mount a challenge to the award already
announced by the LAC. If they have challenged the award
they must withdraw the petition to avail of the benefit of the
Special Rehabilitation Package.
Sd/-
(G.S. MEENA)
Addl. Secretary (L&B)"
8. The petitioners accepted such package (SRP) and gave an undertaking
in accordance with the terms of the package of their having accepted
the compensation including SRP, leading to cessation of all their rights
qua the acquired land. In the undertaking given by the petitioners, it
was categorically stated that no cause of action would arise for
agitating the matter in any court of law or authority or authorities and
that it was towards the full and final settlement in respect of the
acquired land.
9. Be it noted that these undertakings of the petitioners were made prior to
the commencement of the 2013 Act, i.e. on 01.01.2014.
10. There is no denial in Court today that the present petitioners are
identically placed as in the case of (i) Bhim Singh & Ors. v.
Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors., W.P.(C) 9101/2014 and other
batch cases; (ii) Jai Kishan & Anr. v. Government of NCT of Delhi &
Ors., W.P. (C) 5395/2015 and other batch cases; and (iii) Vijender
Singh Vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors., W.P. (C) 2783/2015.
11. For the detailed reasons as discussed in the case of Bhim Singh & Ors.
(supra) and other batch cases; Jai Kishan & Anr. (supra) and other
batch cases; and Vijender Singh (supra) and other batch cases, the
present petitions are dismissed but without any costs.
12. All the pending applications stand disposed of.
13. Interim orders, if any, stand vacated.
G.S.SISTANI, J
V. KAMESWAR RAO, J
NOVEMBER 02, 2017/ck
