Suresh Kumar v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Delhi High Court · 19 Jul 2016 · 2016:DHC:5065-DB
Badar Durrez Ahmed; Ashutosh Kumar
W.P.(C) 9094/2015
2016:DHC:5065-DB
property petition_allowed Significant

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court held that acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, without possession or compensation for over five years before the 2013 Act, are deemed lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.

Full Text
Translation output
WP(C) 9094/2015
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
JUDGMENT
delivered on: 19.07.2016
W.P.(C) 9094/2015 & CM 20587/2015
SURESH KUMAR AND ORS. ..... Petitioners
versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr Sameer Jain.
For the Respondents : Mr Siddharth Panda with Mr P. Venkatesan for LAC/L&B.
Mr Dhanesh Relan for DDA.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR
JUDGMENT
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL)

1. By way of this writ petition the petitioners are 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 petitioners, consequently, seek a declaration that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1894 Act’) and in respect of which Award No.63/82-83 dated 31.01.1983 was made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioners’ land comprised in Khasra No. 319/3(02-13), 323(02-16), 329/1/1 (0-14) and 2016:DHC:5065-DB WP(C) 9094/2015 324/2(04-13) measuring 10 Bighas and 16 Bishwas in Village Pul Pehladpur shall be 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 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. Harakchand

(ii) Union of India and Ors v. Shiv Raj and Ors: (2014) 6

(iii) Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Association v. State of

(iv) Surender Singh v. Union of India and Ors.: W.P.(C)

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. The writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. There shall be no order as to costs.

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J JULY 19, 2016/ab ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J