GYAN CHAND AND ORS Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
LAWS(DLH)-2017-12-320
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on December 13,2017

GYAN CHAND And ORS Appellant
VERSUS
Union of India And Ors Respondents




JUDGEMENT

G.S.Sistani, J. - (1.)This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners seek a declaration that the acquisition proceedings in respect of the land comprising in Khasra Nos.274 (4-16), 275 (4-16), 276 (3-16), 277 (3-06), 278 (1-18), 279 (0-07), 280 (2-16), 281 (4-11), 282 (0-5), 283 (4-16), 284 (4-16), 285 (4-16), 286 (5-4), 287 (2-16), 288/2 (1-15), 294/1 (0-16), 295 (4-16), 296 (2-12), 297 (1-08), 298 (4- 16), 304/2 (0-10), 306 (0-08), 307 (3-19) and 308 (1-16), total measuring 71 bighas and 15 biswas (2/3rd share) and full share in 299 (04-16) situated in the revenue estate of village Kotla Mahigram, Tehsil-Mehrauli, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the subject land") are deemed to have lapsed in view of the fact that compensation has not been paid although possession has been taken over.
(2.)The necessary facts to be noticed for disposal of this writ petition are that a Section 4 notification of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was issued on 06.04.1964. Section 6 declaration was made on 07.12.1966. Thereafter an Award was made in the year 1986-87. It is the case of the petitioner that the compensation with respect to the subject land has not been paid.
(3.)The counsel for the petitioners submits that since the compensation has not been tendered, but the possession has been taken, the petitioners would be entitled to a declaration and compensation under Section 24 (1)(b) of the Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as "the New Act"). Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the case of the petitioner would be fully covered by the decision rendered by the Apex Court in Pune Municipal Corporation & Anr. v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki & ors., 2014 3 SCC 183. He further submits that in the counter affidavit the LAC has admitted that compensation was not tendered but deposited in RD.
;


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