Delhi High Court
Mehdi Hasan vs Government Of Nct Of Delhi on 24 September, 2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: September 24, 2018
+ W.P.(C) 5570/2015
MEHDI HASAN ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sandeep Bajaj, Ms. Aakansha
Nehra & Mr. Soayib Qureshi,
Advocates
Versus
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Through: Ms. Deepika, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
1. Impugned order of 19th February, 2015, rejects petitioner's
application for allotment of alternate plot in lieu of land acquired on the
ground that purchase of the acquired land was made by petitioner within
five years of issuance of Notification for acquisition of subject land under
Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
2. The challenge to the impugned order is on the ground that the
acquired land was purchased on 25th November, 1994 and the
Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was
apparently published in daily newspapers much after the said Notification
was published in official gazette on 27th October, 1999 and so, the
purchase of subject land was beyond the period of five years. It is
submitted that as per Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, not
only the Notification has to be published in official gazette but it has to be
published in two daily newspapers and in the instant case, the publication
in the newspapers was obviously beyond the period of five years of the
purchase of subject land and the last date of such publication has to be
considered. To submit so, reliance is placed upon Supreme Court's
decisions in Bihar State Housing Board Vs. State of Bihar and Ors.
(2003) 10 SCC 1 and Chandra Bhan (dead) through legal representatives
and ors. Vs. Ghaziabad Development Authority and ors. (2015) 15 SCC
343.
3. Counsel for respondent supports the impugned order and submits
that since the Notification was published on 27th October, 1999 in the
official gazette and the purchase of subject land was within five years and
so, rejection of petitioner's application was justified. To submit so,
attention of this Court is drawn to Guidelines for allotment of alternate
plots issued by Government of NCT of Delhi (Annexure P-6).
4. Upon hearing and on perusal of impugned order, material on record
and decisions cited, I find that purchase of subject land was made by
petitioner was on 25th November, 1994 and the Notification under Section
4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, in respect thereof was published on
27th October, 1999 and the period between the date of purchase of subject
land and gazette notification is few days less than five years. However,
despite opportunity given, respondent has not placed on record as to when
the Notification of 27th October, 1999 was published in the daily
newspapers. Supreme Court in Chandra Bhan (Supra), has reiterated that
the last date of publication is to be treated as the date of Notification.
Meaning thereby, even if Notification under Section 4 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 is published in the official gazette, but the date on
which it was published in the daily newspapers, would be the last date of
its publication. In the instant case, last date of publication of Notification
under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is not forthcoming in
the counter affidavit filed by respondent.
5. In view of aforesaid, rejection of petitioner's application for
allotment of alternate plot in lieu of land acquired, on the premise that the
purchase of subject land was made within five years of the said
Notification, is unwarranted. Hence, impugned order is set aside with
direction to respondent to consider petitioner's application for allotment
of alternate plot in lieu of acquired land, within a period of twelve weeks
and the fate of said application be made known to petitioner within two
weeks thereafter, so that petitioner may avail of the remedies, as available
in law, if need be.
6. With aforesaid directions, this petition is disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
SEPTEMBER 24, 2018
r
