Diwan Singh Yadav v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Delhi High Court · 26 Feb 2018 · 2018:DHC:1428-DB
G.S. Sistani; Sangita Dhingra Sehgal
W.P.(C) 11391/2016
2018:DHC:1428-DB
property petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition holding that acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 do not lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act where possession was taken and compensation deposited.

Full Text
Translation output
W.P.(C) 11391/2016
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Judgement:26th February, 2018
W.P.(C) 11391/2016
DIWAN SINGH YADAV .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. M.P. Bhargava Advocate.
VERSUS
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. ....Respondents
Through: Mr. Siddharth Panday Advocate for LAC/L&B/R-2, Mr. Pawan Mathur
Advocate for DDA/R-3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J (ORAL)
JUDGMENT

1. With the consent of the parties, the present writ petition is set down for final hearing and disposal.

2. This is a petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India filed by the petitioner seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings in respect of the land of the petitioner admeasuring 1/6th share out of 37 Bighas 16 Biswas comprised in Khasra No. 341(4-05), 343(03-08), 344(09-04), 345(03-01), 346(14-11), 347(01-02) and 348(02-05) (i.e. 03 Bighas 15 Biswas and 6 Marla), situated in the revenue estate of village Ladha Sarai, Tehsil Mehrauli, New Delhi (hereinafter referred as the 'subject land') stand lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 2018:DHC:1428-DB (hereinafter referred to as '2013 Act') as neither the possession of the aforesaid land has been taken nor compensation has been paid to the petitioner.

3. The necessary facts to be noticed for disposal of this writ petition are that a Section 4 notification of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was issued on 23.01.1965. Section 6 declaration was made on 06.01.1969. Thereafter an Award bearing no. 64/1983-84 was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector on 20.10.1983. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that neither the possession of the aforesaid land has been taken nor compensation has been paid. Moreover, enhanced compensation, as per the order dated 12.05.2008 passed by this court in LAC No.159/2007, was also not paid to the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner would be entitled to a declaration under Section 24 (2) of the Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as 'the New Act').

4. On the other hand, Mr. Yeeshu Jain, learned counsel appearing for LAC submits that the possession of the subject land has been taken over and the compensation has been deposited with the Court of concerned ADJ. Relevant Para(s) of the counter affidavit filed by LAC reads as under:

"7 That in the present case, the possession of the above mentioned lands were taken over and handed over to the beneficiary department on 26/10/1983. As per the Statement-A the status of compensation is as under:-

S.No. Name Amount Remarks

1. Balam Singh 37324.85 Sent to ADJ vide Ch.No. OA121210 dated 09.11.83 for Rs.261273.91

2. Deevan Singh 37324.84

3. Chand Kaur 37324.85

4. Sarbati 37324.84

5. Mohar Kaur 37324.85

6. Asharfi 37324.84

7. Girdari 37324.84

9. That it is humbly submitted that in the present case provisions of Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 would not be applicable as the possession of land in question has already been taken over by the Government and handed over to the beneficiary department and the compensation has been deposited with the court of concerned ADJ, thus the land is free from all encumbrances whatsoever.”

5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

4,052 characters total

6. Reading of the counter-affidavit filed by the LAC as well as the perusal of the record, shows that the possession of the subject land admeasuring 1/7th share out of 37 Bighas 16 Biswas comprised in Khasra No. 341(4-05), 343(03-08), 344(09-04), 345(03-01), 346(14-11), 347(01-02) and 348(02-05)(i.e. 03 Bighas 15 Biswas and 6 Marla), situated in the revenue estate of village Ladha Sarai, Tehsil Mehrauli, New Delhi was duly taken over and handed over to the beneficiary department on 26.10.1983 and the compensation with respect to the above mentioned land, has been deposited with the Court of ADJ vide Cheque No. OA121210 on 09.11.1983. Resultantly, the relief so claimed based on Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act cannot be granted.

7. Hence we are of the view that the present petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed.

8. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J. G.S.SISTANI, J. FEBRUARY 26, 2018