The petition seeking a writ to declare acquisition of land lapsed under the 2013 Act was dismissed as withdrawn by the Court, which noted the petitioner had been granted liberty to file a fresh petition explaining the inordinate delay.
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
+ W.P.(C) 9550/2016 HARBIR AND ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Arun Kumar Kaushik, Advocate. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Rishabh Sahu with Mr. Shireen Khan, Advocate for UOI. Mr. Dhanesh Relan, Standing Counsel with Mr. Rajeev Jha, Advocate for DDA. Mr. Yeeshu Jain with Ms. Shilphi Chaudhary, Advocate for LAC, L&B.
CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA
O R D E R % 08.04.2019
order or direction thereby quashing the Award No. 15/1992-93 of Village Behlolpur Khadar, Delhi thereby the aforesaid land belonging to the petitioners or their predecessor in interest acquired, to the extent of the aforesaid land.”
vacated. The points urged in the counter affidavits of the LAC and the DDA are reserved to be urged at the appropriate stage.
S. MURALIDHAR, J.
I.S. MEHTA, J.
APRIL 08, 2019 hs
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Mahavir v. Union of IndiaFollowed¶3
Mahavir v. Union of India (2018) 3 SCC 588 · Who else cites this
Mool Chand v. Union of IndiaFollowed¶3
Mool Chand v. Union of India) 2019 (173) DRJ 595 [DB]
Harbir and Ors.
Union of India and Ors.
S. Muralidhar
I.S. Mehta
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
