LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR (SOUTH) Vs. HARI CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No. 3435 of 2016 by which the High Court has allowed the said writ petition and has declared that the acquisition with regard to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed under Sec. 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 2013"), the Land Acquisition Collector (South), New Delhi has preferred the present appeal.

(2.) From the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court and even as per the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Land Acquisition Collector before the High Court, it was the case on behalf of the appellant that the physical possession of the subject land was taken over and handed over to the beneficiary department on 14/7/1987. However, thereafter and relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. Vs. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors., (2014) 3 SCC 183, the High Court has allowed the said writ petition and has declared that the acquisition with respect to the land in question is deemed to have lapsed on the ground that the compensation with respect to the land in question had not been paid.

(3.) Applying the law laid down by this Court in the case of Indore Development Authority (supra) to the facts of the case on hand and the fact that the possession of the land in question was taken over on 14/7/1987, there shall not be any deemed lapse of acquisition as observed and held by the High Court. Under the circumstances, the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court is unsustainable.