AJAY KUMAR SANGHI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter has been received on transfer.

(2.) In W.P.(C) No. 12188/2009 the petitioner Ajay Kumar Sanghi has claimed to be the owner of the land measuring 6 Bighas 4 Biswa forming part of Khasra No. 97, 98/2, situated on Main Mathura Road in the Revenue Estate of Tajpul, Delhi by virtue of sale deed dated 21.10.1970 duly registered in the office of the Sub-Registrar, while in W.P.(C) No. 1017/2010 the petitioners claim themselves to be the owners of piece of land measuring 6 Bighas 6 Biswa forming part of Khasra No. 106, 105/2, 104/2 situated on the main Mathura Road in Revenue Estate of Tajpul, Delhi.

(3.) The main grievance raised by the petitioners in both the writ petitions is that they were in peaceful possession of the said land in question since 1970 and it is only when the Government of NCT of Delhi had taken a stand in their counter affidavit in W.P.(C) No. 10518/2009 the petitioners came to derive knowledge of the fact that the decree against them had been passed under Section 81 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act without their knowledge. The petitioners further averred that in the year 2009, Delhi Police took possession of the land bearing Khasra No. 97 on the assumption that the said land belongs to Gaon Sabha and after having learnt the same the petitioner Ajay Kumar Sanghi had filed a writ petition bearing W.P.(C) No. 7641/2009 against the Delhi Police for unauthorized possession of the said land. It is further stated by the petitioners that during the pendency of the said petition (W.P.(C) No. 7641/ 2009) the Government of NCT of Delhi initiated land acquisition proceedings by issuing notification under Section 4 & 6 of the Land Acquisition Act to acquire the said land in question. It is the said land acquisition proceedings which were challenged by the petitioner Ajay Kumar Sanghi in W.P.(C) No. 10518/2009 and it is only in the said proceedings that the petitioners came to know about the said ex-parte orders passed by the Revenue Assistant under Section 81 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act. Necessary steps thereafter were taken by the said petitioners to inspect the relevant records of the Revenue Assistant and after inspection of the same the petitioners learnt that the notices in the said proceedings under Section 81 were never served upon them and in fact were sent to obscure addresses. The petitioners thus have claimed that under Rule 21B of the Delhi Land Reforms Rules, 1954 it was mandatory on the part of the Revenue Assistant to have informed the land owners before initiating any proceedings under Section 81 of the said Act. Counsel thus states that the mandate of the said rule was not followed by the Revenue Assistant and therefore principles of natural justice have been violated by the Revenue Assistant.