JOGINDER KAUR &ORS Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAWS(DLH)-2018-2-187
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Decided on February 05,2018

Joginder Kaur AndOrs Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA Respondents




JUDGEMENT

G. S. Sistani, J. - (1.)Counter affidavit has been handed over in court; the same is taken on record.
(2.)This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioners seeking a declaration that the acquisition proceedings in respect of the land of the petitioners admeasuring 1 bigha comprised in Khasra No.731, situated in the revenue estate of village Tuglakabad, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the subject land") stand lapsed in view of Section 24 (2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as "2013 Act"), as neither the physical possession has been taken nor compensation has been paid to the petitioner.
(3.)In this case, a Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was issued on 10.11.1960, a declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 04.01.1969. As per the writ petition, Mr.Trilochan Singh, father of the petitioners was the owner of built up property admeasuring 1 bigha comprised in Khasra No.731, situated in Village-Tuglakabad, Delhi and after his death the suit land was inherited by the petitioners. The father of the petitioners died on 27.01.1986. Thereafter, on 19.09.1986 an Award bearing No.66/86-87 was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector. On 05.10.2015, one of the villagers filed a Writ Petition (Civil) No.1422/2015 challenging the acquisition proceedings and the said writ petition was allowed. The petitioners claim to be the legal heirs of Mr.Trilochan Singh. Counsel for the petitioners submits that possession has not been taken over due to stay of dispossession and the compensation being disputed has been sent to RD on 19.01987 which fact is borne out from paras 4 and 5 of the counter affidavit which has been handed over by counsel for LAC in the Court today. He further submits that the case of the petitioner is fully covered by a decision rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation & Anr. v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki & ors., (2014) 3 SCC 18
;


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