Delhi High Court
Brahm Singh vs Govt Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors on 11 September, 2018
$~7
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Judgment:11th September, 2018
+ W.P.(C) 10671/2016
BRAHM SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vishal Maan, Advocate.
versus
GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Siddhart Panda, Adv for LAC/L&B.
Ms. Mrinalini Sen and Ms. Kritika
Gupta, Advts. for DDA
% CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J. (ORAL)
1. 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 his 1/18th share in the land, comprised in Khasra
No.55 admeasuring 5 Bighas 5 Biswas situated in the revenue
estate of Village Said-ul-ajab, Delhi (hereinafter referred 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 neither the actual
possession of the subject land has been taken nor the
compensation has been paid to the petitioner.
2. In this case, a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition
Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') was issued on
13.11.1959 and declaration under Section 6 was made in
10.11.1966. Thereafter, an Award bearing No.149/1986-87 was
passed by the Land Acquisition Collector under Section 11 of the
Act on 19.09.1986.
3. Mr. Vishal Maan, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
since the possession of the subject land has not been taken and
compensation in respect thereof has not been paid to the petitioner
thus, the petitioner would be entitled to a declaration that the
acquisition proceedings with respect to land of the petitioner are
deemed to have lapsed in view of Section 24 (2) of the 2013 Act.
4. Mr. Siddharth Panda, learned counsel for the LAC submits that the
actual physical possession of the subject land was taken on
23.09.1986 but the payment of compensation in respect of the
subject land could not be ascertained. Paragraph 7 of the counter
affidavit filed by the LAC reads as under:-
"7. That in the present case, the possession of the
above mentioned land was taken over and handed
over to the beneficiary department on 23.09.1986.
however, the payment of compensation with respect to
the above mentioned land could not be ascertained as
the statement "A" is not traceable. It is further
submitted that the petitioner is only one of the co-
sharer, other co-sharers have not approached this
Hon'ble Court. The petitioner has not placed on
record any document which could suggest that the
petitioner has been authorized by other co-shares.
The petitioner herein at best claimed for his own
share and not other co-shares."
5. Ms. Mrinalini Sen, learned Counsel for DDA submits that physical
possession of the subject land was taken over on 23.09.1986 for the
public purpose of planned development of Delhi. Paragraph (b) of
the counter affidavit filed by the DDA reads as under:-
" I say that the petitioner claims to have co-
ownership and undivided interest to the extent of
1/18th share, over the entire and every parcel of land
comprised in Khasra. No.55 total admeasuring
5Bigha, 5 biswas, situated in revenue estate of village
said-ul-jab, new Delhi (hereinafter referred to as
("disputed land"). The aforesaid disputed land was
notified under section 4 of the land acquisition act
1894 herein after referred to as "old act") vide
Notification No. F9 (16)/80/L&B dated 25.11.1980,
under section 6 of the old act vide notification No. F9
(20)/85/L&B in 1985, which finally culminated into
award bearing no. 149/1986-87 in 1987. The physical
possession of the disputed land was taken over on
23.09.1986 for the public purpose of planned
development of Delhi. The true translated copy of the
possession proceedings are annexed here with as
annexure R1. The compensation against the award
was paid to the land and building department vide
Cheque No. 0081462 dated 27.1.1986 for an amount
of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- only"
6. We have heard learned counsels for the parties.
7. Reading of the counter affidavit filed by the LAC clearly shows
that although the actual physical possession of the subject land has
been taken on 23.09.1986 however whether the amount of
compensation has been tendered to the petitioner can not be
ascertained nor statement is traceable. The petitioner has made a
categorical statement on oath that he has not received the
compensation.
8. Having regard to the submissions made and the stand taken by the
LAC in the counter affidavit that possession has been taken but
compensation has not been paid, we are of the considered view that
the necessary ingredients for the application of Section 24 (2) of
2013 Act stand satisfied and since the award having been
announced more than five years prior to the commencement of the
2013 Act the petitioner is entitled to a declaration that the
acquisition proceedings initiated under the Act with regard to the
subject land are deemed to have lapsed. It is ordered accordingly.
9. The writ petition stands disposed of in above terms.
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J
G.S.SISTANI, J
SEPTEMBER 11, 2018
//gr
