NEENA NARANG Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Union of India And Ors
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.)The counter affidavit handed over by Mr Panda on behalf of respondent No.2 is taken on record. The counter affidavit handed over by Mr Kush Sharma on behalf of respondent no.3 is also taken on record.
The learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to file any rejoinder affidavit inasmuch as he would be relying on the averments made in the writ petition.
(2.)The petitioner seeks 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. A declaration is sought to the effect that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1894 Act') in respect of which Award No.14/1987-88 dated 26.05.1987 was made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioner's land comprised in khasra nos. 814 (3-5) and 815 (1-12) measuring 4 bighas 17 biswas in all in village Satbari, Delhi, shall be deemed to have lapsed.
(3.)Though the respondents claimed that possession of the said land was taken on 14.07.1987, the petitioner disputes this and maintains that physical possession has not been taken. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the possession of the land was taken for the planned development of Delhi but in the counter affidavit it has not been stated that the land in question has been utilised. However, insofar as the issue of compensation is concerned, it is an admitted position that it has not been paid.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.