MOOL CHAND Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought quashing the possession proceeding dated 27.3.2001, copy of which has been attached as Annexure P-6 and has also prayed for directions to quash notifications/notices issued under Sections 4, 6, 9 and 10 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(2.) There are nine petitioners in this case, who claim to be the owners of land comprised in khasra Nos. 985 (4-16); 986 (4-16); 987 (3-12), 978/1 (4-06), 991/2 (1-08); 959 (1-12); 960 (1-18); 961/1 (3-7); 961/2 (1-09); 962/1 (2-08); 973/1 (2-08); 974 (3-15), 976 (1-03); 977/1 (1-12); 984/2 (1-03) and 979/1 (0-01) situate within revenue estate of village Mahipalpur, which land is stated to be built up area.

(3.) It is alleged by the petitioners that on 23.1.1965, notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued notifying the intention of the Government to acquire land in the revenue estate of village Mahipalpur including the land aforementioned for public purpose at public expense, namely, Planned Development of Delhi. It was followed by declaration, issued under Section 6 of the Act on 22.12.1966. In addition, notices under Sections 9 and 10 were issued on 22.6.1983. Feeling aggrieved by the acts of respondents in initiating proceedings to acquire the land and having issued notices under Sections 9(1) and 10 of the Act, writ petitions No. 130 and 1386 of 1983 were filed by the petitioner in which notices were issued to the respondents to show cause why rule nisi be not issued and in the meanwhile status quo was directed to be maintained as regards possession, occupation and construction. It is alleged that on 19.9.1983 interim stay was confirmed but acquisition proceedings were allowed to continue. Awards No. 33/86-87 and 34/86-87 were passed by the Collector Land Acquisition on 17.9.1986 and 16.9.1996 respectively. Writ petitions filed by the petitioners were dismissed on 20.3.1997 relying upon the judgment of Full Bench of this Court in Roshanara Begum v. Union of India, (1996) I AD (Delhi) 6 : 1996 (36) DRJ 34 (FB), which was approved by Supreme Court in Murari and others v. Union of India and Others, JT 1996 (9) SC 742.