Delhi High Court
Ravi Dutt Sharma And Anr. vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors. on 6 February, 2018
$~50
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Judgment : 06th February, 2018
+ W.P.(C) 7239/2016
RAVI DUTT SHARMA AND ANR. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Raj Kumar Chandiwal, Advocate.
versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Nikita Salwan, Advocate for DSIIDC
Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel for
LAC/L&B with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi,
Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
G. S. SISTANI, J. (ORAL)
1. By the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, the petitioners seek a declaration that the
acquisition proceedings with respect to the land of the petitioners
i.e. agricultural land in village Karala in Rectangle No. 37/1 Khasra
Nos. 6/1 (0-04), Khasra No. 38/1/2 (2-16), 2/1 (0-7), Khasra No. 38
2/2 (4-9) 3 (4-9), 9/1 (3-16), 10 (4-12), Khasra No. 38/1 9/2 (1-0),
11/2 (4-9), 12/1 (3-16) (hereinafter referred to as 'Subject Land'),
has 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 compensation has been paid nor the
physical possession has been taken.
2. In this case, a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition
Act, 1894 was issued on 25.08.2005. A declaration under Section
6 of the said Act was made on 10.07.2006 and thereafter an award
was pronounced by the Land Acquisition Collector on 26.05.2008
with respect to 1905 Bighas 05 Biswa of land in Village Karala.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the
petitioner is fully covered by the decision rendered by the Apex
Court in Pune Municipal Corporation & Anr. V. Harak Chand
Misiri Mal Solanki & Ors., reported in (2014) 3 SCC 183, as
neither compensation has been paid nor possession has been taken.
4. Counter affidavit has been filed by the LAC as also by DSIIDC,
the beneficiary department.
5. According to the counter affidavit filed by LAC, the physical
possession of the subject land has been taken and compensation
has been tendered to the owners of the land.
6. Ms. Salwan, learned counsel appearing for DSIIDC has drawn the
attention of the Court to paras 7 to 12 of the counter affidavit to
show that physical possession of the subject land has been taken
and compensation has been tendered to the petitioners by cheque
Nos. 733946 and 733947 both dated 15.04.2009 for Rs.39,95,182/-
each.
7. Ms. Salwan submits that vide order dated 01.10.2008, the
Government of NCT of Delhi decided to give Special
Rehabilitation Package for the people affected by land acqustion
and enhanced compensation was given to the petitioners to
rehabilitate themselves. She further submits that the petitioners
denied the benefit of Special Rehabilitation Package and received
additional compensation vide cheque Nos. 929512 and 929513
both dated 13.12.2011 for Rs.34,86,146/- each.
8. Ms. Salwan further submits that after taking possession of the
subject land for public purpose of 'Developing New Industrial
Area', the DSIIDC in order to protect the land from encroachment,
awarded the work of construction of boundary wall around the
acquired land and executed an agreement No. DSIIDC/CPM (CD-
VIII)/Actts./2010-2011/01 dated 04.05.2011. Photographs
showing the construction of boundary wall have also been annexed
along with the counter affidavit.
9. Ms. Salwan further submits that as per the undertaking furnished
by the petitioners at the time of receiving the payment of Special
Rehabilitation Package having given up their all rights make it
abundantly clear that they are not in possession of the subject land.
10. At this stage, Mr. Chandiwal, learned counsel for the petitioner
wishes to withdraw the present petition.
11. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
G. S. SISTANI, J
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J
FEBRUARY 06, 2018
gr
