Allowed

Jagbir Singh & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.

Delhi HC9 Aug 2016W.P.(C)/11235/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a writ petition declaring that land acquisition proceedings initiated under the 1894 Act had lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, as no possession was taken and compensation paid before the 2013 Act's commencement, satisfying Supreme Court precedent.

What did the court decide?

Declaration that acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, in respect of the petitioners' land are deemed to have lapsed.

Jagbir Singh & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors. — Land Acquisition | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

$~45

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

Judgment delivered on: 09.08.2016

¶4

+ W.P.(C) 11235/2015

¶5

JAGBIR SINGH & ANR ..... Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents

¶8

Advocates who appeared in this case:

¶9

For the Petitioners	: Mr N.S. Chechi.
For the UOI	: Mr Chiranjeev Kumar with Mr Mukesh Sachdeva.
For the L&B/LAC	: Mr Yeeshu Jain with Ms Jyoti Tyagi.
For the DDA	: Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal for DDA.
	Ms Minal Sehgal for applicant in CM 27335/2016.

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR

¶11

J U D G M E N T

¶12

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL)

¶13

CM 27335/2016

¶14

This is an application for impleadment. We are not inclined to

¶15

entertain this application because the person seeking impleadment has no right over the land in question. We are, therefore, dismissing this application. However, the dismissal is without prejudice to the rights that he may have against DDA in law.

¶16

Page 1 of 3

¶17

WP(C) 11235/2015

¶18

The application is dismissed.

¶19

W.P.(C) 11235/2015 & CM 29273/2015

¶20

Mr Yeeshu Jain has handed over a counter affidavit on behalf of the respondent no.3 which is taken on record. The learned counsel for the petitioners does not wish to file any rejoinder affidavit and places full reliance on the averments made in the writ petition.

¶21

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.6D/Supp/86-87 was made, inter alia , in respect of the petitioners’ land comprised in Khasra No.268 (7-15) measuring 7 bighas 15 biswas in Village Jasola shall be deemed to have lapsed.

¶22

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

¶23

Page 2 of 3

¶24

WP(C) 11235/2015

¶25

five years prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act. All the ingredients of

¶26

section 24(2) of the 2013 Act as interpreted by the Supreme Court and this Court in the following decisions stand satisfied:-

¶27