Delhi High Court
Lalit Kapur vs Union Of India And Anr on 16 July, 2018
$~70
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 16th July, 2018
+ W.P.(C) 252/2017
LALIT KAPUR ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr Bhagwat Pershad Gupta and
Mr Priyanshu Aggarwal, Advs
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR ..... Respondents
Through: Mr Yeeshu Jain, SC with Ms Jyoti
Tyagi, Adv for L&B/LAC
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
G.S.SISTANI, J. (ORAL)
1. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India whereby the petitioner seeks a declaration that the
acquisition proceedings with respect to the land of the petitioner falling in
khasra No. 521/1 Min measuring 14 biswas situated in the Revenue Estate of
Village Kilokari, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to 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 the
compensation has not been tendered.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the decision of the
Constitution Bench would have no impact on the facts of the present case as
the stand of the LAC is that compensation has not been tendered.
3. In the present case, a notification under Section 4 of the Land
Acquisition Act was issued on 23.06.1989 and Section 6 declaration was
made on 22.06.1990. Thereafter, an award bearing No. 14/92-93 was
rendered on 19.06.1992. Admittedly the possession of the subject land was
taken on 27.12.1990. It is the case of the petitioner that no compensation has
been tendered.
4. Mr Jain, learned counsel for the LAC submits that actual physical
possession of the subject land was duly taken on 27.12.1990 which fact is
also admitted by the petitioner herein. However, he submits that as per the
Naksha Muntazamin and Statement A, there is no entry regarding payment
of compensation.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
5. Para 4 of the counter affidavit filed by the LAC reads as under:-
"That the writ petition is liable to be dismissed as not only
the actual vacant physical possession of the subject land
falling in khasra number 521/1 min (0-14) was duly taken on
27.12.1990 on the spot by preparing possession proceeding
on the spot and handed over to DDA which is being admitted
by the petitioner as page 12 of the writ petition. The
petitioner has not explained as to why it kept silent from the
year 1990 till 2017if the compensation was not actually paid
to him or his father nor any application has been placed on
record to suggest that the petitioner was aggrieved of non-
payment of compensation. It is submitted that the petitioner
is apparently trying to take advantage of ill kept revenue
records and initiated present writ petition on basis of RTI
filed in the year 2015. As the case may be, as per NM and
Statement-A does not bear any entry regarding the payment
of compensation ."
7. Reading of the counter affidavit leaves no room for doubt that
there is no entry in the Naksha Muntazamin or Statement A regarding
payment of compensation to the petitioner. The award having been
announced more than five years prior to the commencement of the
2013 Act, in our view, the petitioner is entitled to declaration that the
acquisition proceedings in respect of the subject land are deemed to
have lapsed. It is ordered accordingly.
8. Resultantly, the writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.
G.S.SISTANI, J
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J
JULY 16, 2018
SU
