Delhi High Court
Rajender Singh vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors. on 11 September, 2018
$~44
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Judgment: 11th September, 2018
+ W.P.(C) 10455/2017
RAJENDER SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Sunil K.Goel, Advocate
versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Yeeshu Jain, standing counsel for
LAC/L&B with Ms.Jyoti Tyagi, Adv.
Mr.Ajay Verma, senior standing
counsel for DDA with Ms.Mansi
Bajaj and Ms.Nidhi Tyagi, Advts.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
G.S.SISTANI, J. (ORAL)
1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India seeking a declaration that the acquisition
proceedings initiated in respect of the land of petitioner comprised in
Khasra no.274 (02-14), 276/2 (02-00), 277/1 (01-08), 277/3 (00-07),
299 (05-17), total land measuring (13-06), having 1/4th share
(measuring 03 Bigha 07 biswas), situated in the revenue estate of
village Ghonda Gujran Khadar, Shahdra, 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 the '2013 Act'), as compensation has not been tendered
to the petitioner although possession of part of the land has been taken.
2. In this case, a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition
Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was issued on
23.06.1989. A Section 6 declaration was made on 20.06.1990 and
thereafter, an Award bearing no.08/1992-93 was rendered.
3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that in this case compensation has
not been tendered to the petitioner although possession of part of the
land has been taken and thus, the petitioner is entitled for a declaration
that the acquisition proceedings in respect of the subject land are
deemed to have lapsed.
4. Counter affidavit has been filed by the LAC. Para 5 of the counter
affidavit filed by the LAC reads as under:
"5. That it is submitted that for the purpose of planned
development of Delhi, the answering respondent issued a
Notification u/S. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on
23.06.1989 which was followed by Notification u/s 6 of the
said Act dated 20.6.1990 for planned development of Delhi
for the acquisition of the lands falling in village Ghonda
Gurjan Khadar. However from the records, it appears that
for the Khasra number 274 (2-14), 276/2 (2-00), 277/3 (0-
07), 299 (5-17) no notification was issued even not
acquired vide Award No.08/1992-93. The possession
report however reflected that the possession of khasra
number 277/1 (1-08) was duly taken and handed over to
the requisition agency on the spot on 21.3.2007. That an
Award bearing no.8/92-93 dated 19.06.1992 was also
passed however the recorded owner/s never came forward
to receive any compensation."
(emphasis added)
5. Mr. Yeeshu Jain, learned counsel for the LAC submits that possession
of Khasra no. 277/1 (1-08) has been taken but possession with respect
to the balance land has not been taken. However, he fairly admits that
the compensation has not been tendered to the petitioner as the
petitioner never turned up to receive the compensation.
6. Counter affidavit has also been filed by the DDA, Para 6 of which is
reproduced as below:
"6. It is submitted that the possession proceedings (Kabza
Karvahi) of Khasra No.277/1 (1-08) was undertaken on
21.03.2007 and transferred to JE/SDV/ED-2 on 19/9/2007.
However, Khara Nos. 274 (2-14), 276/2 (2-00), 277/3 (0-08),
299 (5-17) were not acquired for DDA. It is further submitted
that khasra 277/1 falls in Zone 'O' which as per the Zonal
Development Plan is only to be developed as "Green" and as
per Naksha Mutzamin, the land belongs to "Abadi". ...."
7. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and considered
their rival submissions.
8. Reading of the counter affidavits filed by the LAC and DDA leaves no
room for doubt that compensation has not been tendered to the
petitioner and physical possession of the entire subject land has also
not been taken and thus, the necessary ingredients of Section 24(2) of
2013 Act are accordingly met.
9. Having regard to the fact that compensation has not been tendered to
the petitioner and since the Award having been announced more than
five years prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act, the case of the
petitioner is covered by the provisions of Section 24(2) of the 2013
Act, thus, the petitioner is entitled to a declaration 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. However, as prayed, petitioner would only be entitled for
compensation, which shall be paid to him within one year from today.
10. The writ petition stands disposed of.
G.S.SISTANI, J.
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J
SEPTEMBER 11, 2018
rb
