Delhi High Court
Lal Chand vs Union Of India & Anr. on 19 September, 2017
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: September 19, 2017
+ W.P.(C) 206/2016
LAL CHAND ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Arun Kumar Kaushik,
Advocate
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel
with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for respondent-
L&B/LAC
Mr. Dhanesh Relhan & Ms. Gauri, Advocates
for respondent No.2-DDA
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J. (OPEN COURT)
1. The petitioner claims a direction that the lands in Khasra No.514/1
min (02-00), situated in the revenue estate of village Kilokari, New Delhi
be declared free from acquisition in terms of Section 24(2) of the Right to
Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereafter referred to as 'the
Act of 2013").
2. In the present case, notification Section 4 of the then prevalent
Land Acquisition Act (of 1894) was of 23.06.1989. Later, a declaration
under Section 6 the said old Act was issued on 22.06.1990. The
acquisition proceedings were complete when the Award was announced
on 19th June, 1992. The petitioner on the strength of entries in the khasra
girdawari, contends that neither was possession taken from him nor was
compensation given to him, even though he is entitled to it.
3. Counter affidavit of Government of NCT of Delhi , refutes the
claim made in this petition and states as follows:-
"That the present writ petition is liable to be
dismissed as the petitioner is not the recorded owner of
the subject land bearing Khasra number 514/1 (2-00) nor
he has made any averment regarding his entitlement to
file the present writ petition nor any annexure has been
filed in this behalf. The writ petition is further liable to be
dismissed as the actual vacant physical possession of the
entire land measuring (11-09) i.e (1-05) Custodian and
(10-04) Shamlaat Deh, falling in the said Khasra number
514/1 was duly taken on 27.12.1990 by preparing
possession proceedings on the spot and by handing over
the same to the DDA on the spot, thus the above-said land
vests with the appropriate Government absolutely without
any encumbrance under section 16 of Land Acquisition
Act, 1894. The compensation for the land i.e (1-05) was
duly sent to the Reference Court under section 30-31 of
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 21.3.1995 and 6.8.2009
respectively. The compensation for the remaining land i.e
(10-04) was also paid to different eleven claimants in
accordance with their respective different shares. It is
reiterated that the petitioner is not the recorded owner of
the subject land nor the petitioner has filed any document
in support of his claim to become entitled to receive the
compensation."
4. In the present case, the fact remains that the petitioner claims to be
in possession of the lands which are essentially public. Even the khasra
girdawari extracts relied upon by him clearly record that the lands are
owned by one- Shamlat Deh. In these circumstances, the relief claimed
by petitioner cannot be granted.
5. The writ petition is dismissed.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT
(JUDGE)
SUNIL GAUR
(JUDGE)
SEPTEMBER 19, 2017
r
