High CourtsDivision Bench

Ashok Kumar Sharma vs Land & Building Department & Anr

Delhi High Court · Decided on 5 October 2018 · Citation: (2018) 10 DEL CK 0119

HON’BLE JUDGES
G.S.Sistani, J · Sangita Dhingra Sehgal, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 — Section 24(2) · Land Acquisition Act, 1894 — Section 4, 6 · Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 226
RESULT
Disposed Off
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No.605 OF 2018
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

27 paragraphs · 508 words

G.S.SISTANI, J

1.

This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioner seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings with

respect to 3 bighas 11 biswas land comprised in Khasra No. 78/1 and 4 bighas 5 biswas land comprised in Khasra No. 78/10 situated in the revenue

estate of Village Rithala, Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the subject land’) are deemed to have lapsed in view of Section24(2) of the Right to

Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘2013

Act’), as though the physical possession of the subject land has been taken over, the compensation in respect thereof has not been tendered to the

petitioner.

2.

It is submitted that a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (here in after referred to as ‘the Act’) was issued on

13.12.1981. A Declaration under section 6 of the act was issued on 16.04.1984. Thereafter, an Award bearing No. 16/198586 was passed on

10.09.1985.

3.

Mr. N.S. Dalal, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the physical possession of the subject land has already been taken over and the

compensation in respect thereof has not been paid, the petitioner would be entitled to a declaration under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.

4.

On the other hand, Mr. Sachin Nawani, learned counsel for LAC submits that the actual vacant physical possession of the subject land was taken

on 03.07.2006 and the same was handed over to the DDA. It is further submitted that the compensation has not been disbursed to interested persons.

Learned counsel for the LAC relies on paras 8 & 9 of the counter affidavit, which we reproduce below:

“4. That the Khasra No. 78/1(3-11) and 10(4-5) are in ownership rights of Kali Ram S/o Tulsi(1/1 share) at item No. 65. The possession of Khasra

No. 78/1(3-11),(10(4-5) total area 7 Bigha 16 Biswa has been taken over handed over to the beneficiary, Delhi development authority on 31.07.2006.

It is further submitted that possession of Khasra No. 78/11(4-5), 12(4-16) total admeasuring 9 bigha 1 biswa has not been taken over.â€​

“5. That as per available records viz statemen „A‟ as well as RD Register available in the office of the LAC compensation has not been

disbursed to the interested person.â€​

5.

We have heard the learned counsels for the parties and considered their rival submissions.

6.

Having regard to the submissions made by the LAC that the compensation in respect of the subject land has not been tendered to the petitioner and

since the Award having been announced more than five years prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act, the case of the petitioner is covered by the

provisions of Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act and thus, the petitioners are entitled to a declaration that the acquisition proceedings initiated under theAct,

with regard to the subject land are deemed to have lapsed.

7.

In above terms, the writ petition stands disposed of.

8.

Ordered accordingly.