The Court dismissed the writ petition seeking quashing of 1980 land acquisition proceedings due to an inordinate delay of nearly 35 years and lack of efforts to claim compensation. It also noted the petitioner is not a recorded owner.
Writ petition dismissed as the suit is barred by laches due to a delay of nearly 35 years.
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.
$~23
ANJEET SINGH ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. N. Prabhakar, Advocate
versus
THE HON'BLE LT. GOVERNOR OF DELHI & ORS.
..... Respondents Through: Mr. Dhanesh Relan, Standing counsel with Ms.Mrinalini Sharma & Mr. Rajiv Jha, Advocates for Respondent/DDA Mr. Yeeshu Jain & Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for Respondent/LAC/L & B
CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
O R D E R % 07.12.2018
the Court for relief. In the counter affidavit filed by LAC in paras 4 & 5 it is stated as under:
“4. That it is submitted that the lands of village Lado Sarai were notified vide Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act dated 13.11.1959 which was followed by Notification under section 6 of the said Act vide Notification dated 16.5.1966. The Award No. 36/80-81 was also passed on 19.6.1980 which was challenged by the petitioners in CWP No. 444/82. The said writ was disposed off in 1995 in lead case 'Roshnara Begum Vs UOI. It is submitted that the physical possession of the subject Land was however taken on 6.1.1988 on the spot and handed over to them. The Award file is in the Hon‟ble Court of ADJ, Tis Hazari, Delhi. A letter dated 28.03.2017 has been sent to the Hon'ble ADJ, Tis Hazari, Delhi to return the said award file. The status of the compensation could not be ascertained as the Naksha Muntazamin is in torn condition. Hence it is humbly requested that the present case may not be decided against the interest of the Govt. till the above said award file is received from the Hon'ble Court. It is also submitted that the petitioner is admitting to the fact that the appropriate Government has taken the physical possession of the subject land falling in khasra number 52/02 measuring 14 biswa.
| S.No. | Name of Recorded | Share | Compensation | Remark |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Owner with particulars |
||||
| 1. | Radhey Shyam s/o |
¼ share | 22892.77 | Disputed |
| Hazari Lal | ||||
| 2. | Surendra Kumar s/o | ¼ share | 22892.77 | Disputed |
| Guni Nath | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 3. Smt. Shakuntla Devi | ¼ share | 2246.85 | Disputed |
| (Wd/o Munshi Ram d/o Kishori Lal |
|||
| 4. Braham Prakash & | ¼ share | 22892.76 | Disputed |
| Godu Prasad sons of Shanti Swarup |
S. MURALIDHAR, J.
SANJEEV NARULA, J.
DECEMBER 07, 2018 mw
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking quashing of land acquisition proceedings can be entertained in view of an inordinate delay of nearly 35 years.
Whether the petitioner has locus standi to contest the acquisition as they are not the recorded owners of the land.
Anjeet Singh
The Hon'ble Lt. Governor of Delhi & Ors.
S. Muralidhar
Sanjeev Narula
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
