In this writ petition, the Delhi HC declared that acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act initiated before the 2013 Act have lapsed under Section 24(2). The court allowed the petition.
Declaration that the acquisition proceedings under the 1894 Act are deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~41
*** IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI**
ANSAR AHMED .... Petitioner
versus
GOVT.OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS
..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner : Mr Rajiv Kumar Ghawana For the Respondent L&B/LAC : Mr Siddharth Panda For the Respondent DDA : Mr Sanjeev Sabharwal
CORAM:HON’BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL)
respondent nos. 1&2 is taken on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to file any rejoinder affidavit inasmuch as he would be relying on the averments made in the writ petition. He also reiterates the contents of the rejoinder affidavit that is filed in response to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the DDA.
W.P.(C) No. 5270/2015
Page 1 of 3
W.P.(C) No. 5270/2015
Page 2 of 3
the 2013 Act as interpreted by the Supreme Court and this Court in the following cases stand satisfied:-
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J
MARCH 08, 2016 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J kb
W.P.(C) No. 5270/2015
Page 3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 initiated prior to the 2013 Act are deemed to have lapsed under Section 24(2) thereof.
Whether the necessary ingredients for applying Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act are satisfied in the present case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and OrsReferred¶24
(2014) 3 SCC 183 · Who else cites this
Union of India and Ors v. Shiv Raj and OrsReferred¶25
(2014) 6 SCC 564 · Who else cites this
Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Association v. State of Tamil Nadu and OrsReferred¶26
Civil Appeal No. 8700/2013 decided on 10.09.2014
Surender Singh v. Union of IndiaReferred¶27
WP(C) 2294/2014 decided on 12.09.2014
Girish Chhabra v. Lt. Governor of Delhi and OrsReferred¶27
WP(C) 2759/2014 decided on 12.09.2014
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ansar Ahmed
Govt. of NCT of Delhi
DDA
Badar Durrez Ahmed
Sanjeev Sachdeva
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
