ANOOP SINGH AND ORS. Vs. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS.
LAWS(DLH)-2015-3-402
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on March 23,2015

Anoop Singh And Ors. Appellant
VERSUS
Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors. Respondents




JUDGEMENT

Badar Durrez Ahmed, J. - (1.)THE learned counsel for the respondent has handed over the counter affidavit on behalf of respondent no.1. The same is taken on record. The learned counsel for the petitioners does not wish to file any rejoinder affidavit inasmuch as the averments contained in the writ petition would be relied upon.
(2.)BY way of this writ petition the petitioners seek the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the "2013 Act") which came into effect on 01.01.2014. The petitioners, consequently, seek a declaration that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the "1894 Act") and in respect of which Award No. 30/1986 -87 dated 19.09.1986 was made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioners' land, comprised in Khasra Nos. 690/2 (0 -18), 692/2(2 -15), 694/1 (0 -18), 695 (4 -16), 700/2 (2 -8) measuring 11 bighas and 15 biswas in all, in village Mahipalpur, New Delhi, shall be deemed to have lapsed.
It is the case of the petitioners that the physical possession of the subject land had not been taken. However, the learned counsel for the respondents contend that possession was taken on 23.09.1986. But we note from the order dated 09.09.2008 in W.P.(C) 6425/1998 that possession in respect of the subject land has not been taken as noted in the said order. Therefore, we have to accept the contention of the petitioners that possession of the subject land has not been taken. Insofar as compensation is concerned, the learned counsel for the respondents contend that the same has been deposited in the treasury, though the same had not paid to the land owners nor offered to the land owners.

(3.)THE learned counsel for the respondents placed reliance on the second proviso to Section 24(2) of the 2013 Act, which has been introduced by virtue of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (Amendment) Ordinance, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as the "said Ordinance"). The newly added proviso reads as under: -
"Provided further that in computing the period referred to in this sub -section, any period or periods during which the proceedings for acquisition of the land were held up on account of any stay or injunction issued by any court or the period specified in the award of a Tribunal for taking possession or such period where possession has been taken but the compensation lying deposited in a court or in any account maintained for this purpose shall be excluded."

(underlining added)

;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.