W.P.(C)/7494/2014 of JAGBIR SINGH Vs LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR (SOUTH EAST) & ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Judgment delivered on: 08.12.2014

W.P.(C) 7494/2014 & CM 17743/2014JAGBIR SINGH

..... Petitioner

versus

LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR (SOUTH EAST) & ANR.

..... Respondents

Advocates who appeared in this case:For the Petitioner: Mr Deepak KhoslaFor the Respondents: Mr Yeeshu Jain and Ms Jyoti Tyagi for LAC/L&B.Mr Dhanesh Relan and Mr Arush Bhandari for DDA.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMEDHON'BLE MR JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL

J U M N T

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL)

1.Mr Jain appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1 has handed overthe counter affidavit. The same is taken on record. The learned counsel forthe petitioner does not wish to file any rejoinder affidavit.

2.By way of this writ petition the petitioner is seeking the benefit ofSection 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land

Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referredto as ‘the 2013 Act’) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. The petitioner,consequently, seeks declaration that the acquisition proceeding initiatedunder the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1894Act’) and in respect of which Award No.205/86-87 dated 19.09.1986 wasmade, inter alia, in respect of the petitioner’s land comprised in KhasraNo.202/1 to the extent of 5 biswas in Village- Kotla Maigiran, New Delhishall be deemed to have lapsed.

3.It is an admitted position that neither physical possession of thesubject lands has been taken by the land acquiring agency, nor has anycompensation been paid to the petitioner. The award was made more thanfive years prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act. All the ingredients ofsection 24(2) of the 2013 Act as interpreted by the Supreme Court and thisCourt in the following decisions stand satisfied:-

(i)PuneMunicipalCorporationandAnrv.Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors: (2014) 3SCC 183;Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors: (2014) 3SCC 183;(ii)Union of India and Ors v. Shiv Raj and Ors:(2014) 6 SCC 564;(2014) 6 SCC 564;(iii)Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Association v. Stateof Tamil Nadu and Ors: Civil Appeal No.8700/2013 decided on 10.09.2014;of Tamil Nadu and Ors: Civil Appeal No.8700/2013 decided on 10.09.2014;

(iv)Surinder Singh vs. Union of India and Ors.:W.P.(C) 2294/2014 decided 12.09.2014 by thisCourt.

4.As result the petitioner is entitled to declaration that the saidacquisition proceedings initiated under the 1894 Act in respect of the subjectlands are deemed to have lapsed. It is so declared.

5.The writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. There shall be noorder as to costs.

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J

DECEMBER 08, 2014mk

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J