Delhi High Court
Ashok Kumar Aggarwal vs Union Of India And Anr on 13 March, 2018
$~31
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Judgement: 13th March, 2018
+ W.P.(C) 4484/2016
ASHOK KUMAR AGGARWAL .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Triloki Nath Garg with Ms. Nishtha
Garg, Advocates.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with
Ms. Jyoti Tyagi Adv. for L&B/LAC.
Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Standing
Counsel for DDA with Mr. Hem Kumar
& Ms. Simonee Kumari Advocates.
Mr. Sachin Nawani, Adv. for Respondent
No.1.
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 present writ petition is set down
for final hearing and disposal.
2. This is a petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India filed by
the petitioner seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings
with respect to 200 sq.yds of land falling in Khasra No.'s 61/9/2
and 61/12, situated in the revenue estate of village Tikri Kalan,
Delhi (hereinafter referred as the 'subject land') stand 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 physical
possession of the subject land has been taken nor compensation in
respect thereof has been paid to the petitioner.
3. The necessary facts to be noticed for disposal of this writ petition
are that a Section 4 notification of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was issued on 15.06.2006.
Section 6 declaration was made on 14.06.2007. Thereafter an
Award bearing no. 06/DC(W)/2007-08 was passed by the Land
Acquisition Collector on 01.05.2008.
4. Ms. Nishtha Garg, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
since the compensation in respect of the subject land has not been
paid, the petitioner would be entitled to a declaration under Section
24 (2) of the 2013 Act. Counsel further submits that her
submissions are further fortified by the stand taken by LAC in their
counter affidavit.
5. Mr. Yeeshu Jain, learned counsel for the LAC submits that neither
the physical possession of the subject land has been taken nor the
compensation in respect thereof has been tendered to the petitioner.
Relevant portion of the counter affidavit filed by LAC reads as
under:
"4A. xxx The Award was also passed vide Award No.
6/2007-08 dated 1.5.2008 however the physical
possession of the subject land falling in khasra
number 61/9/2 and 61/12 could not be taken nor the
compensation have been paid."
6. Counter affidavit has also been filed by DDA, relevant portion of
which reads as under:
"It is further submitted that the physical possession of
the acquired land Khasra No.61//9/2(1-06) and
61//12(4-16) in the revenue estate of village Tikri
Kalan, New Delhi has not been handed over to the
respondent-Delhi Development Authority by the
LAC/Land and Building Department, Govt. of NCT of
Delhi due to built-up. "
7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
8. Taking into consideration the submissions made and the
categorical assertion made in the counter affidavit filed by LAC
and DDA that the actual physical possession of the subject land has
not been taken and the compensation has not been paid to the
petitioner and since the award has been announced more than five
years prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act, the petitioner is
entitled to a declaration under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act that
the acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition
Act, 1894 with regard to the subject land are deemed to have
lapsed. It is ordered accordingly.
9. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.
G.S.SISTANI, J.
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J.
MARCH 13, 2018
//gr
