Alok Gupta vs State Of Raj And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 411 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

           S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13129/2014
Alok Gupta S/o Shri Arvind Gupta, House No.27, Gopalbadi,
Ajmer Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
1.     State Of Rajasthan, Through Chief Secretary, Govt. Of
       Rajasthan, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2.     The Secretary, Urban Development And Housing
       Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Government
       Secretariat, Jaipur, Rajasthan.
3.     The Land Acquisitan Officer, Urban Development
       Schemes, Jaipur Development Authority, Indira Circle, Jln
       Marg, Jaipur.
4.     The Jaipur Development Authority, Through Its Secretary,
       Indira Circle, Jln Marg, Jaipur.
                                                                ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)        :     Mr. Saransh Saini
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Anil Mehta, AAG


       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI
                 Judgment / Order
18/01/2022

1. Petitioner has preferred this Writ Petition inter-alia praying

therein that the declaration be given to the effect that with the

land acquisition proceedings concerning the land of the petitioner

covered by Khasra No. 221 to 223 and 226 to 236 admeasuring

4.26 hectares situated in village Newta, Tehsil, Sanganer, District

Jaipur which has already been lapsed on account of the non-

deposit of the compensation and in view of the mandatory

provision contained in sub-Section (2) of Section 24 of the Right

to Fair Compensation and Transparency in the Land Acquisition

and Rehabilitation Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to

as 'the Act of 2013' for convenience). A further prayer is made for

written possession of the land belonging to the petitioner to

handover to the petitioner.

(2 of 2) [CW-13129/2014]

2. Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the

judgment of the Apex Court "Indore Development Authority Vs.

Manohar Lal and Ors. (2020) 8 SCC 129.

3. It is submitted that since the possession of the land was

taken prior to the coming into force of the Act, 2013, enforced

with the effect from January, 2014, proceedings have not lapsed

and the writ petition be disposed of accordingly.

4. Counsel put in appearance on behalf of the State as well as

JDA contended that the award was passed on 12.07.2007, the

compensation was deposited in Court on 07.05.2013 and the

possession was taken on 13.05.2013. It is also contended that

since possession was taken prior to the coming into force of the

Act, 2013. The provisions of sub-Section (2) Section 24 of the Act,

2013 will not be applicable.

5. It is further contended that in view of the Judgment "Indore

Development Authority Vs. Manohar Lal and Ors." (Supra) since

the possession was taken prior to the coming into force of the Act,

2013, the proceedings will not lapse.

6. I have considered the contentions.

7. Admittedly, the possession was taken on 13.05.2013 i.e.

prior to the coming into force of the Act, 2013. In view of the

Judgment "Indore Development Authority Vs. Manohar Lal and

Ors." (Supra), the proceedings did not lapse, hence, this Court is

not inclined to entertain the Writ Petition.

8. This Writ Petition is according, dismissed.

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

NIKHIL KR. YADAV /21

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)