Delhi High Court
Shyam Sunder Agarwal & Ors vs The Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors. on 14 September, 2018
$~14
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Judgement: 14th September, 2018
+ W.P.(C) 1908/2015
SHYAM SUNDER AGARWAL & ORS .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. T.N Singh and Mr. Vikas K Singh,
Advocates.
Versus
THE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain and Ms. Jyoti Tyagi
Advocates for L&B/LAC.
Mr. Dhanesh Relan Standing Counsel for
DDA with Ms Komal Sorout and
Ms.Kajri Gupta, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
G.S. SISTANI, J. (Oral)
1. This is a petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India filed by
the petitioners seeking a declaration that the acquisition
proceedings with respect to land of the petitioners comprised in
Khasra No. 50/16 (measuring 1 Bhiga), 46/22 (measuring 3 Bhigas
16 Biswas), 50/4 (measuring 1 Bigha 5 Biswas), 50/7 (measuring 1
Bigha 1 Biswa), 46/23 (measuring 1 Bigha 3 Biswas), 50/9
(measuring 1 Bigha 17 Biswas), 50/2 (measuring 4 Bighas 16
Biswas) and 50/3 (measuring 15 Biswas) situated in the revenue-
estate of village Pehladpur Bangar, NCT of 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 the actual physical
possession of the subject land has been taken nor compensation in
respect thereof has been paid to the petitioners.
2. In this case, a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition
Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') was issued on
21.03.2003, a declaration under Section 6 was made on
19.03.2004. Thereafter, an award bearing no.06/2005-06/DC(N-W)
was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector on 12.7.2005.
3. Mr. T.N Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
since the actual physical possession of the subject land has not
been taken and compensation in respect thereof has not been paid,
thus the petitioners would be entitled to a declaration under Section
24 (2) of the 2013 Act.
4. Mr. Yeeshu Jain, learned counsel for the LAC submits that actual
physical possession of land comprised in Khasra No. 50/9 has been
taken over on 31.8.2005; however the amount of compensation in
respect of the entire subject land has not been paid to the
petitioners. Para 5 and 6 of the counter affidavit filed by LAC read
as under :-
"5. ... as the actual vacant physical possession of the
subject land falling khasra number 50/9 (3-16) out of
total land measuring (4-16) in revenue village Prelad
Pur Bangar was duly taken on 31.8.2005 and handed
over to the requisition agency i.e. DDA on the spot by
preparing possession proceedings on the spot as the
purpose of the acquisition was implementation of the
Rohini Residential Scheme.... "
"6. ...if the petitioners were really interested in
getting the compensation and/or have any valid title
document in their respective names, they would have
taken the matter to its logical end by approaching the
answering Respondent with the requisite documents of
ownership and/or the court of Law by seeking the
dispute to be referred to Reference Court which
apparently and manifestly could not be done in the
absence of the title documents...."
5. Mr. Jain, learned counsel for the LAC has opposed the petition on
the ground that the petitioners are claiming relief based on General
Power of Attorney, Will, receipt etc. which cannot confer title on
the petitioners.
6. On the other hand, Mr. T. N. Singh learned counsel for the
petitioners submits that as far as objection with regard to the
ownership and title is concerned, the case would be covered by the
decision rendered by the Supreme Court in Govt. of NCT of Delhi
vs. Manav Dharma Trust and another, reported in 2017 (6) SCC
751.
7. Counter Affidavit has also been filed by DDA, relevant portion of
which reads as under:-
"6. ... thus, physical and legal possession of land of
above said land of Khasra No. 26//22 (4-07) & 23 (3-
16) has also duly, validly and legally been handed
over to the answering Respondent by the Land
Acquisition Collector/Land and Building Department
of the Govt. of NCT of Delhi on 26.08.2005 at site and
the physical possession of land of Khasra No. 50//3
(4-16) 4 min 91-03), 7 min (1-02) and 9 min (3-16)
was handed over at site on 31.8.2005..."
" 7. The payment of compensation has already been
duly remitted to the Land Acquisition Collector
through the Land and Building Department of Govt.
of NCT of Delhi, vide cheques No. 074064 dated
9.8.2005 for Rs 80,40,76,004/-..."
8. We have heard learned counsels for the parties.
9. Having regard to the observations made by the Apex Court in the
case of Manav Dharma Trust (Supra), in our view the objection
raised by Mr. Jain, learned Standing Counsel for LAC/L&B is
misplaced. In the case of Manav Dharma Trust (supra), the Apex
Court has held as under :
"28. Thus, the subsequent purchaser, the assignee, the
successor in interest, the power-of-attorney holder,
etc., are all persons who are interested in
compensation/landowners/ affected persons in terms
of the 2013 Act and such persons are entitled to file a
case for a declaration that the land acquisition
proceedings have lapsed by virtue of operation of
Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act. It is a declaration qua
the land wherein indisputably they have an interest
and they are affected by such acquisition. For such a
declaration, it cannot be said that the respondent-writ
petitioners do not have any locus standi."
10. Reading of the counter affidavit filed by LAC makes it abundantly
clear that actual physical possession of land comprised only under
Khasra No. 50/9 measuring 3 Bigha 16 Biswas has been taken,
however the amount of compensation in respect of the entire
subject land has not been tendered to the petitioners.
11. Taking into consideration the submissions made and the stand
taken by LAC that only part possession of the subject land has
been taken and the compensation has not been tendered to the
petitioners, we are of the considered view that the necessary
ingredients of Section 24 (2) of 2013 Act stand satisfied. Since the
award having been announced more than five years prior to the
commencement of the 2013 Act, the petitioners are entitled to a
declaration that the acquisition proceedings initiated under the Act
with regard to the subject land are deemed to have been lapsed. It
is ordered accordingly.
12. However we make it clear that this order would not confer any title
on the petitioners. The question of title of the subject land is left
open to be decided in the appropriate court of jurisdiction.
13. The writ petition stands disposed of in above terms.
G.S.SISTANI, J.
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J.
SEPTEMBER 14, 2018
/gr
