Delhi High Court
Jeet Singh And Ors. vs Union Of India And Ors. on 30 August, 2018
$~38
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Judgment: 30th August, 2018
+ W.P.(C) 9247/2017
JEET SINGH AND ORS ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr.S.K. Rout with Mr.Aman Mehrotra,
Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr Yeeshu Jain and Ms Jyoti Tyagi, Advs
for LAC/L&B.
Mr.Kunal Sharma, Advocate for DDA.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J. (ORAL)
1. This is a petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India filed by
the petitioners seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings with
respect to the land of the petitioners, admeasuring 20 Bighas comprised in
Khasra No.4//26/2 situated in the revenue estate of Village Sahipur, Delhi
(hereinafter referred as the 'subject land') are deemed to have lapsed in view
of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in
Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter
referred to as '2013 Act') as neither the possession of the subject land has
been taken nor compensation has been paid to the petitioners.
2. In this case, a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition
Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') was issued on 13.11.1959 and a
declaration under Section 6 was made on 15.07.1966. Thereafter, an Award
bearing No.2119/A was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector under
Section 11 of the Act on 19.09.1986.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that neither the possession
of the subject land has been taken nor compensation has been paid to the
petitioners and thus, the petitioner would be entitled to a declaration that the
acquisition proceedings are deemed to have lapsed in view of Section 24 (2)
of the 2013 Act.
4. Mr Yeeshu Jain, learned counsel for the LAC submits that neither the
possession of the subject land has been taken nor compensation has been
paid to the petitioners. Paragraph 7 of the counter affidavit filed by the LAC
reads as under:-
"It is submitted that as per the records of the
Respondent neither the possession of the lands being
subject matter of this petition nor the compensation has
been paid to the Petitioner. It is submitted that as per
Naksha Mutazamin, the recorded owners are Rajaram,
Shashiram & Lakshman Singh all S/o Sh. Pokhar with
1/3 share each at item no. 1 to 3 respectively and the
entire awarded compensation is lying in Revenue Deposit
vide RD No.544 dated 30.03.1987 amounting to rupees
4,61,429/-. It is further submitted that as per the records
there are no notices issued u/s 12(2) of the LA Act,
however, there is a public notice issued which was duly
served/pasted for the information of the public regarding
announcement of the Award on 19.09.198."
5. We have heard learned counsels for the parties.
6. Reading of the counter affidavit filed by the LAC shows that neither
the possession of the subject land has been taken nor compensation has been
paid to the petitioners. However, entire awarded compensation amounting to
rupees 4,61,429/- is lying in Revenue Deposit vide RD No.544 dated
30.03.1987 and thus, the necessary ingredients of Section 24(2) of 2013 Act
are accordingly fulfilled.
7. Having regard to the submissions made and the stand taken by the
LAC in the counter affidavit, we are of the considered view that the
necessary ingredients for the application of Section 24 (2) of 2013 Act stand
satisfied. Since the award having been announced more than five years prior
to the commencement of the 2013 Act and having regard to the fact that
neither the possession of the subject land has been taken nor compensation
has been paid to the petitioners, in our view, the petitioners are entitled to a
declaration that the acquisition proceedings initiated under the Act with
regard to the subject land are deemed to have lapsed. It is ordered
accordingly.
8. The writ petition stands disposed of in above terms.
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J
G.S.SISTANI, J
AUGUST 30, 2018
afa
