Sat Prakash Sharma v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Delhi High Court · 28 Nov 2016 · 2016:DHC:7686-DB
Badar Durrez Ahmed; Jayant Nath
W.P.(C) 8616/2015
2016:DHC:7686-DB
property petition_allowed Significant

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act lapse under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act if no possession or compensation occurs within five years of the Act's commencement.

Full Text
Translation output
WP(C) 8616/2015
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
JUDGMENT
delivered on : 28.11.2016
W.P.(C) 8616/2015 & CM 18718/2015
SAT PRAKASH SHARMA ..... Petitioner
versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr Vishal Maan withMr Shitiz Agnihotri
For the Respondent LAC/L&B : Mr Siddharth Panda
For the Respondent DDA : Mr Pawan Mathur
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT NATH
JUDGMENT
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL)

1. By way of this writ petition the petitioner is seeking 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 petitioner, consequently, seeks a declaration that the acquisition proceeding initiated 2016:DHC:7686-DB under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1894 Act’) and in respect of which Award No.14/1987-88 dated 26.05.1987 was made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioner’s land comprised in Khasra Nos.225/1 (1-14), 225/2 (1-06), 234 min (2-0) and 230 min (3-04) measuring 8 bighas and 4 biswas in all in village Satbari deemed to have lapsed.

2. It is an admitted position that neither physical possession of the subject lands has been taken by the land acquiring agency, nor has any compensation been paid to the petitioner. 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 petitioner is 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. The writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. There shall be no order as to costs.

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J JAYANT NATH, J NOVEMBER 28, 2016 SR