Dismissed

Devender Singh v. Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Delhi HC21 Mar 2018W.P.(C)/2660/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged land acquisition proceedings claiming lapse due to Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act alleging non-payment of compensation. The court dismissed the petition as the recorded owner received compensation in 1983 and the petitioner failed to appear.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed for non-merit and non-appearance/non-prosecution of the petitioner.

Devender Singh Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~47

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 2660/2017

¶4

DEVENDER SINGH ..... Petitioner Through: None.

¶5

versus

¶6

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Yeeshu Jain and Ms.Jyoti Tyagi, Advts. for LAC/L&B. Ms.Ruhi Chopra, adv. for DDA.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL

¶9

O R D E R % 21.03.2018

¶10

This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioner. The petitioner seeks a declaration that the acquisition proceedings with respect to land of the petitioner measuring 3 bighas 16 biswas comprised in old Khasra No.1295 (3-16) and new Khasra No.692 (3-16), situated in the revenue estate of village Mehrauli, New Delhi is deemed to have lapsed in view of the provisions of Section 24 (2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. 2. In this case a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟) was issued on 23.01.1965. A Section 6 declaration was made on 07.12.1966 and thereafter an Award bearing no.80E/1970-71 (Suppl.) was rendered on 09.01.1981. 3. It is the case of the petitioner in the writ petition that the compensation has not been paid to the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner or his legal heirs although the possession of the land was taken by the authorities in the year

¶11

¶12

Counter affidavit has been filed both by the DDA as also by the LAC. As per the counter affidavit filed by the DDA, physical possession of the land in question was taken on 23.09.1981 and the same was handed over to the DDA on 19.11.1981. Copies of the possession proceedings have been placed on record. As per para 4 of the counter affidavit of the LAC, which is reproduced below, the recorded owner was paid compensation vide RV dated 17.02.1983:

¶13

“4. That the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed as the petitioner has claimed the relief for entire khasra number 1295 (3-16) on the pretext that the share was undivided whereas the pleadings reflects that the petitioner is one of the grandson of the recorded owner namely Chunni Lal. The present writ petition is liable to be dismissed as the petitioner has admitted that the possession of the said land was taken by the Government but no compensation was paid to his grandfather which is highly misplaced and incorrect statement. The recorded owner was duly paid the compensation vide RV dated17.2.1983 as the possession of the subject land was taken on 23.09.1981.”

¶14

In view of the stand taken by the LAC in the counter affidavit, we find no merit in the writ petition. Additionally, as none has chosen to appear on behalf of the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed for non-appearance and nonprosecution.

¶15

G.S.SISTANI, J

¶16

SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J

¶17

MARCH 21, 2018 rb /

Devender Singh v. Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devender Singh v. Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raj Degree College Vs National Council for Teacher Education and Anr.

Milap Chand and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Daksh Bassi Vs Union of India and Ors.

Ashish Kumar Verma Vs Union of India and Ors.

Brij Kishore Sabharwal Vs Union of India and Anr.

Ravinder Gosain Vs Punjab & Sind Bank

Mr. Kshitiz Kumar Vs the Lt. Governor of Gnct and Ors.

Mohit Electronics Vs the Workman Tahir Hussain

Dharampal Vs Union of India and Ors.

Chatar Singh and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Jai Singh and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Sukhbir Singh Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Virender Kumar Trehan & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Bir Pal & Ors. Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.