Delhi High Court
Rajeev And Others vs Union Of India And Ors. on 28 September, 2018
$~13
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Judgment: 28th September, 2018
+ W.P.(C) 9441/2015
RAJEEV & ORS ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr Ravinder Narwal, Adv
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr Yeeshu Jain, SC with Ms Jyoti
Tyagi, Adv for LAC/L&B
Mr Dhanesh Relan, SC for DDA with
Ms Gauri Chaturvedi, 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
pertaining to 3 bighas 8 biswas land of the petitioners comprised in Khasra
No. 22//2/2/1/2 situated in the revenue estate of Village Pooth Kalan, 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 physical possession has been taken
nor compensation has been paid.
2. In this case the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition
Act was issued on 11.12.1981, Section 6 declaration was made on
11.04.1984. An Award bearing No. 20/1985-86 was passed on 11.11.1985.
3. Mr Jain, learned counsel for the LAC has drawn attention of the court
to paragraphs 4 and 4A of the counter affidavit and submits that the physical
possession of the subject land has been taken and compensation has been
paid to the recorded owners of the subject land i.e., Suraj Bhan, Kaptan
Singh and Pratap Singh being the predecessor in interest of the petitioners
herein. Copy of the extract from the Naksha Mumtazamin has also been
annexed along with the counter affidavit filed by the LAC. Relevant
paragraphs 4 and 4A of the counter affidavit are reproduced below:-
"4. That the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed
as the actual vacant physical possession of the subject land
failing in khasra number 22//2/2/1/2 (3-08) was duly taken on
the spot on 13.11.1985 by preparing possession proceedings
and handed over to the requisition agency on the spot as also
pursuance to the possession proceedings, stated supra, the
recorded owners namely Suraj Bhan, Rattan Singh, Pratap
Singh & Kaptan Singh having 1/4th share each applied for
release of compensation and after processing their applications
keeping in view that the physical possession have been taken by
the Government, the compensation was duly released to all of
them on different dates. Thus the contention of the petitioners
that the Government has not taken the physical possession of
the subject land nor has paid the compensation is wrong and the
present writ petition deserves dismissal.
4A. That it is submitted that the lands of Village Pooth Kalan
were notified vide Notification under Section 4 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 dated 11.12.1981 which was followed by
the Notification under Section 6 of the Act dated 11.04.1984.
The Award was also passed vide Award No. 20/85-86 dated
11.11.85 and the physical possession of the subject land was
duly taken on the spot as also the compensation has also been
paid to the recorded owners. The petitioners are claiming as
legal heirs of the recorded owners. The petitioners are claiming
as legal heirs of the recorded owners whereas their ancestors
have duly received the compensation by moving appropriate
applications. The copies of the application and other related
documents exhibiting the proof of payment of compensation are
annexed herewith as Annexure R-1 (Colly)."
4. There is no rebuttal to the averments made in the counter affidavit
filed by the LAC which has been filed in the month of January 2017,
accordingly, having regard to the fact that physical possession of the subject
land has been taken and compensation paid, the writ petition is dismissed.
G.S.SISTANI, J
SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J
SEPTEMBER 28, 2018
SU
