The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking to quash a land acquisition award and restore land to the petitioners. The Court rejected the claim on grounds of inordinate delay, laches, and staleness, referencing Supreme Court precedent.
The writ petition was dismissed on grounds of laches and merits; the land acquisition award remains valid.
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.
$~27
CHAHAT RAM & ORS ..... Petitioners Through Mr. Sushant Mukund, Advocate
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr. Yeeshu Jain with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates for Respondent/LAC/L & B Ms. Sapna Chauhan, Advocate for Respondent/DDA
CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
O R D E R % 11.01.2019
“a. May kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus quashing the acquisition of land under Award No.28B/1970-71 qua the land of petitioners, directing the respondents to restore the land bearing Khasra No.275/1, measuring 4 Bhigha 16 Biswa of Village Khichripur, Delhi, to the petitioners.”
“23. In the instant case, the claim has been made not only belatedly, but neither the petitioners nor their previous three generations had ever approached any of the authorities in writing for claiming compensation. No representation had ever been filed with any authority, none has been annexed and there is no averment made in the petition that any such representation had ever been filed. The claim appears not only stale and dead but extremely clouded. This we are mentioning as additional reasons, as such claims not only suffer from delay and laches but courts are not supposed to entertain such claims. Besides such claims become doubtful, cannot be received for consideration being barred due to delay and laches.
S. MURALIDHAR, J.
SANJEEV NARULA, J.
JANUARY 11, 2019 mw
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus quashing the land acquisition award due to inordinate delay.
Whether the petitioner's claim is barred by delay, laches, and staleness despite arguments on merits.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Mahavir v. Union of IndiaExplained¶12
(2018) 3 SCC 588 · Who else cites this
Devender Singh v. The Hon'ble Lt. GovernorFollowed¶14
WP(C) No. 2734/2015
2 provisions across 1 enactments
CHAHA RAM & ORS
UNION OF INDIA & ANR
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
