Full Text
Date of
JUDGMENT
SHAKUNTLA DEVI ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. V.S. Tomar, Advocate
Through Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Mr. Sunil Kumar Jha and Mr. Kushal Raj Tater, Advocates for L&B/LAC.
Mr. Nikhil Goel and Mr. Ashutosh Ghade, Advocates for DDA.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.KAMESWAR RAO G.S.SISTANI, J. (ORAL)
1. Counter affidavit has been handed over in Court by the counsel for the LAC. The same is taken on record.
2. Present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner, seeking following prayers: “A) issue appropriate writ, order, direction in the nature of writ of certiorari to quash and set aside Public Notice dated 21th November, 2012 issued by the Government of NCT of Delhi through the respondent no.2 Land Acquisition Collector, New Delhi pursuant to Notification bearing No.F9(12)/95/L&B/LA/9743 dated 27th June 1996. As more than one year passed and no declaration under Section 6 of the Old Act has been made; 2017:DHC:6969-DB B) to declare proceedings initiated by DDA under Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act, as non-est in the eyes of law at this belated stage as invocation of emergency clause has become a farce; C) to declare that the land acquisition proceedings initiated in respect of the Khasra Numbers enumerated in the GPA to have lapsed; and D) Any other further relief as deemed appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
3. Mr. Tomar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to declaration that the acquisition proceedings qua subject matter of this writ petition with respect to the land comprised in Khasra no.1167(2-8) situated in the revenue estate of Rangpuri, also known as Malikpur Kohi, New Delhi stood lapsed. It is also the case of the petitioner that a Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued on 01.06.1995, which Notification stood lapsed and a fresh Notification was issued on 27.06.1996. thereafter, a Notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 10.01.1997 and an Award was also made on 07.01.1999.
4. Mr. Pathak, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the LAC relies on paras 9 and 11 of the counter affidavit, which read as under:
5. While relying on the aforesaid paragraphs, Mr. Pathak submits that the present petition would not be maintainable.
6. At this stage, Mr. Tomar, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw this petition with liberty to file a fresh petition in accordance with law.
7. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. The liberty, as prayed, granted. CM.APPL 11948/2016 (stay)
8. The application also stands dismissed in view of the order passed in the writ petition. G.S.SISTANI, J. V.KAMESWAR RAO, J. NOVEMBER 15, 2017 pst