Dismissed

Ram Kishan and Anr. v. Delhi Cantonment Board and Anr.

Delhi HC7 Feb 2018W.P.(C)/1060/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners withdrew their writ petition challenging land acquisition proceedings and seeking quashing of show cause notices, reserving the right to approach the court through review or a fresh petition regarding the lapse of acquisition proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh writ petition or seek review.

Ram Kishan and Anr. Vs Delhi Cantonment Board and Anr. — Land Acquisition | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~49

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 1060/2018

¶4

RAM KISHAN AND ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Petitioner No.2, Mr. Parveen Kumar, Advocate.

¶5

versus

¶6

DELHI CANTONMENT BOARD AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Anchit Sharma with Mr. Tarveen Singh Nanda and Mr. Rahul Singhal, Advocates for R-1/DCA.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL O R D E R

¶8

% 07.02.2018

¶9

Two distinct prayers have been made in this writ petition, first prayer is for a declaration sought that the acquisition proceedings with respect to the petitioner‟s property measuring 77 sq. yards comprised in Khasra No.960 is deemed to have lapsed as neither physical possession has been taken nor compensation has been tendered, second prayer is to quash four show cause notices dated 08.11.2017, 04.12.2017, 11.12.2017 and 28.12.2017 issued under the provision of Cantonment Act, 2006 and Public Premises (eviction of unauthorised Occupant) Act, 1971.

¶10

Neither the Land Acquisition Collector nor DDA has been impleaded as party in this writ petition. The petitioner submits that a writ petition bearing No.651/2018 was filed, however, the same was dismissed as withdrawn. The following order was passed:

¶11

“ CM.No.2832/2018 (for exemption)

¶12

Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of.

¶13

W.P.(C) 651/2018, CM No.2831/2018 (for stay)

¶14

After some submissions, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks to withdraw the writ petition to enable the petitioners approach the appropriate Court under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

¶15

The petition and the connected application are dismissed as withdrawn .”

¶16

The petitioner agrees that as far as the proceedings initiated against the petitioner under the provision of Cantonment Act and Public Premises Act, the remedy would not lie before a Division Bench. He further submits that he would make an application for review before the learned Single Judge and limit his prayer only with regard to four show cause notices, he would also seek liberty to amend his writ petition and restrict his prayer only with respect to four show cause notices.

¶17

At this stage, the petitioner also wishes to withdraw this writ petition to seek review of the order dated 23.01.2018. He also seeks liberty to file a fresh writ petition seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings with respect to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed.

¶18

The present petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty, as prayed. Copy of this order be given dasti under the signature of Court Master.

¶19

G. S. SISTANI, J

¶20

SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J

¶21

FEBRUARY 07, 2018/afa

¶22

W.P.(C) 1060/2018

¶23

Page 2 of 2

Ram Kishan and Anr. v. Delhi Cantonment Board and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Kishan and Anr. v. Delhi Cantonment Board and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Woodhill Infrastructure Ltd. Vs State of Uttarakhand and Anr.

Jitendra Misra and Anr. Vs Ministry of Home Affairs and Ors.

Ranbir Kaur & Ors. Vs Delhi Sikh Gurudwara Managing Committee & Ors.

Resident Welfare Association Vs Commissioner Edmc & Ors.

Dharam Chand & Anr. Vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation

Anil Kumar Vs Union of India and Anr.

Unikil Pesticides Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors.

National College of Education Vs National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.

Ramesh Lal and Ors. Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation and Anr.

Rajeev Gupta & Anr. Vs South Delhi Municipal Corporation & Anr.

Nathan Singh Gulshan @ Nathan Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Anu Vs Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi and Ors.

Rama Shankar Khemka Vs Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi and Ors.

H.K. International Vs Union of India and Ors.