W.P.(C)--7768/2015. Case: CHATTER SINGH & ORS Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. High Court of Delhi (India)
| Case Number | W.P.(C)--7768/2015 |
| Citation | NA |
| Judgement Date | December 11, 2018 |
| Court | High Court of Delhi (India) |
$~26 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P. (C) 7768/2015
CHATTER SINGH & ORS ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. K.C. Mittal and Mr.
Jain, Advocates. versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Yeeshu Jain and Ms. Jyoti Tyagi,
Advocates for LAC/L&B.
Mr. Dev P. Bhardwaj, CGSC with Mr. Santosh Kr. Pandey, Advocates for UOI.
Mr. Dhanesh Relan, Standing Counsel with Ms. Gauri Chaturvedi and Ms. Mrinalini Sharma, Advocates for DDA.
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
O R D E R % 11.12.2018
Dr. S. Muralidhar, J. :
-
This is a petition filed by 26 Petitioners seeking the quashing notification dated 23rd January 1965 issued under Section 4 of the Acquisition Act, 1894 (LAA), a notification dated 6th September issued under Section 6 of the LAA and the Award dated 12th
1980 in respect of acquisition of land measuring 25 Bighas 13 Biswas Khasra No. 513/2 located at Village Kusumpur Pahari, Delhi for purpose of the planned development of Delhi. The declaration as to the
W.P.(C) 7768/2015 Page 1
of the acquisition proceedings is sought in terms of Section 24 (2) Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 („the 2013 Act‟).
-
It is stated in the writ petition that the grandfather of the Petitioners purchased the land in question at Khasra No. 513 and had ownership rights. A copy of the jamabandi of the year 1948-49 has enclosed with the petition in support of this plea.
-
It is also acknowledged that there was a reference under Sections 30 31 of the LAA before the Court of the Additional District Judge which came to be finally decided on 31st August 2004. It is then stated when Shri Surat Singh, the father of some of the Petitioners expired in 2013 they made up their minds to contest and thereafter filed the present seeking the above declaration.
-
In response to the notice issued in the petition, the LAC has filed reply which inter alia in para 4 it is stated as under:
“4. That the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed as the petitioners are neither the recorded owner of the subject land falling in khasra number 513/2 (25-13) as the same has been shown as Gair Mumkin Pahar Gram Sabha and the actual vacant physical possession of which was duly taken on 5.11.1980 on the spot by preparing possession proceeding and handed over to the requisition agency. Having an apportionment dispute, the compensation for the same was sent before Reference Court u/s 30-31 of Act, 1894 on 23.1,1989. The writ petition is liable to be dismissed as the petitioners have duly admitted all the above-said facts by disclosing that the father of the petitioner contested the
W.P.(C) 7768/2015 Page 2
case before Reference Court which got dismissed on 31.8.2004 and apparently without any challenge thereafter. It is submitted that the said judgment of Reference Court has since attained finality, the writ petition filed by the petitioners is not maintainable.”
-
Even as regards the taking over of the possession, it is averred in para 5 of the counter affidavit as under:
“5...
To continue reading
Request your trial