Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2015 DAILYLAW 3741 (DEL)

Lalit Jain v. Union of India

2015-07-13

Badar Durrez Ahmed, Sanjeev Sachdeva

body2015
JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J. 1. 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. A declaration is sought to the effect that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1894 Act’) in respect of which Award No. 14/1987-88 dated 26.05.1987 was made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioners’ land comprised in Khasra No. 73/1/1 (2-04), 73/2/2 (1-15), 74/1/2 (1-08) and 75/2 (3-16) measuring 8 bighas 11 biswas in all in village Satbari, New Delhi, shall be deemed to have lapsed. 2. Though the respondents claim that possession of the said land was taken on 14.07.1987, the petitioners dispute this and maintain that physical possession has not been taken. However, insofar as the issue of compensation is concerned, it is an admitted position that it has not been paid. 3. Without going into the controversy of physical possession, this much is clear that the Award was made more than five years prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act and the compensation has also not been paid. The necessary ingredients for the application of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act as interpreted by the Supreme Court and this Court in the following cases stand satisfied:- (1) Pune Municipal Corporation and Another vs. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Others, (2014) 3 SCC 183 . (2) Union of India and Others vs. Shiv Raj and Others, (2014) 6 SCC 564 . (3) Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Association vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Others, Civil Appeal No. 8700 of 2013, decided on 10.9.2014. (4) Surender Singh vs. Union of India & Others, W.P. (C) 2294 of 2014, decided on 12.9.2014 by this Court. (5) Girish Chhabra vs. Lt. Governor of Delhi and Others, W.P. (C) 2759 of 2014, decided on 12.9.2014 by this Court. 4. 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 land are deemed to have lapsed. It is so declared. 5. The writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. There shall be no order as to costs.