Delhi High Court
Mehboobur-Rehman vs Union Of India And Ors. on 4 January, 2018
$~R-20 to 23
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Judgment: 04th January, 2018
+ W.P.(C) 6122/2015
MEHBOOBUR-REHMAN ..... Petitioner
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents
+ W.P.(C) 6133/2015
ABIDA SHAMIM ..... Petitioner
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents
+ W.P.(C) 6137/2015
TANVIR BEGUM ..... Petitioner
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents
+ W.P.(C) 6142/2015
SAAD FIROZ ..... Petitioner
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Present: Mr.M.P.Bhargava, counsel for the petitioners in all the matters.
Mr.Siddharth Panda, counsel for the LAC/L&B deptt. in all the
matters.
Mr.Rahul Bakshi and Mr.Nishant Sharma, Advocates for the
DDA in item no.20.
Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal, Standing counsel for the DDA in item
no.21.
Mr.Arjun Pant, Advocate for the DDA in item no.22.
Mr.Dhanesh Relan and Ms.Akshita Manocha, advocates for the
DDA in item no.23.
W.P. (C) No.6122/2015 etc. Page 1 of 5
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
G.S.SISTANI, J. (ORAL)
1. Although these writ petitions have been heard separately, but for the
sake of convenience a common judgment is being rendered.
2. The petitioners in these writ petitions seek 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 „2013 Act‟) which came into effect on 01.01.2014.
3. A notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
(hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) was issued on 23.06.1989. A
declaration under Section 6 of Act was made on 22.06.1990.
Thereafter, the Land Acquisition Collector passed an Award bearing
no.15/92-93 on 19.06.1992. The petitioners claim that the acquisition
proceedings qua the lands of the petitioners stand lapsed as neither
possession has been taken nor compensation has been paid. The details
of the land of each of the petitioners is extracted below:
Sl. W.P.(C) Name of Details of the subject land
No. No. the petitioner
1. 6122/2015 Mehboobur 1 bigha All situated in Khasra
Rehman 10 biswas No.61min in the
revenue estate of
2. 6133/2015 Abida Shamim 10 biswas Village Behlolpur
Khadar, Tehsil,
Mehrauli, NCT of
3. 6137/2015 Tanvir Begum 10 biswas
Delhi
4. 6142/2015 Saad Firoz 10 biswas
4. Counsel for the petitioners has drawn the attention of the Court to the
counter affidavit filed by the LAC wherein it has been admitted that
compensation has not been paid to the recorded owners. Counsel for
the petitioners disputes that actual physical possession has been taken
and submits that the petitioners continue to remain in actual physical
possession till date. Counsel for the petitioners further contends that
acquisition proceedings with respect to the land measuring 5 biswas
already stand lapsed by a decision rendered by a Co-ordinate Bench of
this Court on 25.08.2015 in W.P.(C) 4370/2015 and the said judgment
stands upheld by the Supreme Court by an order dated 31.08.2016 in
Civil Appeal No.8653/2016 titled as Delhi Development Authority vs.
Shamim Qureshi and Others, except the modification of the judgment
to the extent, as detailed below:
"4. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the
appellant is given a period of one year to exercise its liberty
granted under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation
and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013 for initiation of the acquisition
proceedings afresh.
5. We make it clear that in case no fresh acquisition
proceedings are initiated within the said period of one year from
today by issuing a Notification under Section 11 of the Act, the
appellant, if in possession, shall return the physical possession
of the land to the original land owner."
5. Counsel for the petitioners submits that this Court may also pass a
similar order as passed by the Apex Court. Learned counsels for the
DDA submit that the land was acquired for the purpose of Yamuna
Channelization Scheme.
6. We have heard learned counsels for the parties.
7. The acquisition proceedings qua part of the land measuring 5 biswas
has already been declared to have lapsed vide order dated 25.08.2015
in W.P.(C) 4370/2015. This order has also attained finality, except the
modification which we have extracted hereinabove.
8. Without going into the controversy of physical possession, since the
award was made 5 years prior to the commencement of 2013 Act and
the compensation has not been paid, in our view, the necessary
ingredients for the application of Section 24(2) of the New Act as has
been interpreted by the Supreme Court of India and this Court in the
following cases stand satisfied:
(1) Pune Municipal Corporation & Anr. v. Harakchand
Misirimal Solanki & ors., reported at (2014) 3 SCC 183;
(2) Union of India and Ors v. Shiv Raj and Ors., reported at
(2014) 6 SCC 564;
(3) Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Association v. State of
Tamil Nadu and Ors, Civil Appeal no.8700/2013 decided on
10.09.2014;
(4) Surender Singh v. Union of India & Others,
W.P.(C).2294/2014 decided on 12.09.2014 by this Court; and
(5) Girish Chhabra v. Lt. Governor of Delhi and Ors;
W.P.(C).2759/2014 decided on 12.09.2014 by this Court.
9. The petitioners are accordingly entitled to a declaration that the
subject land(s) are deemed to have lapsed. It is accordingly so
declared. However, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of these
cases, the respondents are given a period of one year to exercise its
liberty granted under Section 24(2) of 2013 Act of the right for
initiation of acquisition proceedings afresh. It is also made clear that
in case no fresh acquisition proceedings are initiated within the said
period of one year from today by issuing a Notification under Section
11 of the Act, the respondents, if in possession, shall return the
physical possession of the land(s) to the original land owner(s).
10. The writ petitions stand disposed of.
G.S.SISTANI, J.
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J
JANUARY 04, 2018
rb
