DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. RAJ SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dtd. 27/11/2018 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition (Civil) No.10800 of 2016 by which the High Court has allowed the said Writ Petition and has declared that the land acquisition proceedings with respect to the land in question under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is deemed to have lapsed under Subsec. (2) of Sec. 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act 2013 '), the Delhi Development Authority has preferred the present appeal.

(2.) From the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court it appears that though in the counter affidavit filed before the High Court filed by the Land Acquisition Collector it was stated that the possession was taken on 19/1/2006. However, the details of the payment of compensation are not available with the LAC Branch and therefore it is not possible to state anything about payment of compensation, the High Court has allowed the Writ Petition and has declared that the land acquisition with respect to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed under Sub­sec. (2) of Sec. 24 of the Act, 2013 solely on the ground that the amount of compensation was not paid to the land owners.

(3.) The view taken by the High Court is unsustainable in view of the Constitution Bench decision of this Court in the case of Indore Development Authority Vs. Manoharlal and Ors., (2020) 8 SCC 129. In paragraphs 365 and 366, the Constitution Bench of this Court has observed and held as under:­