Delhi High Court
Vijay Mohan vs Lt. Governor, Nct Of Delhi And Ors on 15 February, 2018
$~15
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Judgment: 15th February, 2018
+ W.P.(C) 3792/2015
VIJAY MOHAN ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Akhil Sachar, Advocate.
versus
LT. GOVERNOR, NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel
with Ms.Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for
respondent/LAC-L&B Department.
Mr.Dhanesh Relan, Ms.Akshita
Manocha, Ms.Komal & Ms.Gauri
Chaturvedi, Advocates for
respondent/DDA.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
G.S.SISTANI, J. (ORAL)
1. With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is set down for final
hearing and disposal.
2. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed
by the petitioner seeking a writ, order or direction for quashing the
impugned Notification bearing No.F.11(19)/2001/L&B/LA/20112
dated 21.03.2003 as also Notification under Section 6 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894.
3. Mr.Jain, counsel appearing for LAC at the outset submits that as
noticed in the order dated 12.12.2017, counter affidavit filed on
04.01.2017 was withdrawn as it contained incorrect Khasra number.
He submits that time was sought to place a fresh counter affidavit on
record; however he submits that barring incorrect Khasra number and
measurement there is no change in the contents of the counter affidavit
and the LAC would rely upon the same. It is further submitted by
Mr.Jain that he has received comments from the department.
4. Counsel for the petitioner submits that acquisition proceedings
pertaining to the land measuring 1008 square yards comprised in
Khasra Nos.39//7, 8 & 13 min situated in the revenue estate of village
Prehladpur Bangar, National Capital Territory of Delhi (hereinafter
referred to as 'the subject land') is 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 physical
possession of aforesaid land has been taken nor compensation has
been paid to the petitioner.
5. Mr.Sachar further submits that barring the description of the land and
stand taken by the LAC in the counter affidavit so filed which is
identical even now is the same.
6. Mr.Jain, counsel appearing for LAC while relying upon the copy of
the comments received by him submits that the possession has not
been taken and compensation has also not been tendered. Copy of
counter dated 04.01.2017 has been handed over in Court, as also copy
of the comments, both shall form part of the court record. Correction
in the counter affidavit has been made in Court and initialed in today's
date.
7. In this case, a Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition
Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was issued on
21.03.2003, a declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on
19.03.2004 and an Award bearing No.06/2005-06 was passed on
12.07.2005.
8. Counsel appearing for DDA relies upon para 4 (i) of the preliminary
objections. The DDA in para 4 (i) has made the following averments:-
"(i) ............. Physical possession of land of above said
Khasras of Village Prahladpur Bangar was not handed over
to the answering Respondent by the Land Acquisition
Collector/Land and Building Department of the Govt. of NCT
of Delhi on 26.08.2005 due to existence of residential houses,
factories and Kotha Jat as per Possession Proceedings dated
26.08.2005...."
9. Counsel for respondent/DDA submits that the land was acquired for
Planned Development of Delhi for Rohini Residential Scheme.
10. Counsel for the petitioner submits that from 2003 till date, no steps
have been taken by the DDA to take physical possession or to tender
the compensation to the petitioner. Even otherwise, the area is built up
and, thus, simply saying that land is required for Rohini Residential
Scheme, no benefit can be accrue in favour of the respondents. Even
otherwise, it is open for the respondents to acquire the land afresh, if
there is any need arises in the near future.
11. We find force in the submissions made by Mr.Sachar. Nothing has
been produced before us to show as to why steps have not been taken
to take actual physical possession of the subject land since 2005 i.e.
date of the award or tender the compensation nor any document has
been placed on record to show that the land is required immediately
for any scheme.
12. Having regard to the submissions made and the stand taken by the
respondents in their counter affidavits that the physical possession of
the subject land has not been taken and compensation has not been
tendered, the petitioner would be entitled to a declaration in respect of
the land subject matter of writ petition, in terms of Section 24(2) of
2013 Act. It is declared accordingly.
13. No other ground has been urged before us.
14. The writ petition stands allowed.
CM No.6791/2015 (stay)
The application stands disposed of, in view of order passed in the writ
petition.
G.S.SISTANI, J.
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J
FEBRUARY 15, 2018
ssc
