Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
JUDGMENT
JAGBIR SINGH & ORS. Petitioners
For the Petitioners : Mr Manoj Joshi For the Respondents LAC : Mr Yeeshu Jain with Ms Jyoti Tyagi
For the Respondent DDA : Mr Dhanesh Relan with Ms Isha Garg
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR
1. By way of this writ petition the petitioners seek the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 2013 Act’) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. The petitioners, consequently, seek a declaration that the acquisition proceeding initiated 2017:DHC:452-DB under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1894 Act’) and in respect of which Award No.4/2006-07 dated 20.10.2006 was made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioners’ land comprised in khasra nos. 27/2//20 min (3-12) measuring 3 bighas 12 biswas in all in village Pooth Kalan, Delhi, shall be deemed to have lapsed.
2. It is an admitted position that neither physical possession of the subject land has been taken by the land acquiring agency, nor has any compensation been paid to the petitioners. The award was made more than five years prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act. All the ingredients of section 24(2) of the 2013 Act as interpreted by the Supreme Court and this Court in the following decisions stand satisfied:-
(i) Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr v.
(ii) Union of India and Ors v. Shiv Raj and Ors:
(iii) Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Association v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors: Civil Appeal NO. 8700/2013 decided on 10.09.2014; and
(iv) Surender Singh v. Union of India and Ors.:
3. As a result, the petitioners are entitled to a declaration that the said acquisition proceedings initiated under the 1894 Act in respect of the subject lands are deemed to have lapsed. It is so declared.
4. We had impleaded the Gaon Sabha as respondent no.4 and notice was also issued to the newly added respondent no.4. Despite service of notice nobody entered appearance on behalf of respondent no.4. In any event, if there is any dispute regarding title between the petitioner and the Gaon Sabha that has to be sorted out before another forum. Insofar as the present acquisition is concerned, the same has lapsed.
5. The writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. There shall be no order as to costs.
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J ASHUTOSH KUMAR J JANUARY 24, 2017 kb