SUNIL GOEL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions are being taken up together as they involve identical issues. WP(C) 3049/2013 (Sunil Goel and Others v. Government of NCT of Delhi and Others) was, by an earlier order, directed to be taken as the lead matter and the pleadings were to be completed in that matter alone. We shall, therefore, refer to the facts in Sunil Goel .

(2.) On 27.10.1999, a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act"), was issued indicating that the land stated therein was likely to be acquired by the Government of Delhi for a public purpose, namely, Rohini Residential Scheme. The said notification also mentions that the Lt. Governor of Delhi was satisfied that the provisions of sub-Section (1) of Section 17 of the said Act were applicable to the land mentioned in the said notification and that he was pleased, under Section 17(4) of the said Act, to direct that all the provisions of Section 5A of the said Act would not apply.

(3.) This was followed by a declaration under Section 6 of the said Act, which was issued on 03.04.2000 stating that the land mentioned therein was acquired for the public purpose, namely, the Rohini Residential Scheme. The land specified under the said Section 4 and Section 6 notifications, include lands at village Shahbad Daulatpur, Pehladpur Bangar and village Pansali. A number of writ petitions were filed before this court challenging the above notifications. The petitioners in this batch of matters are all those persons, who had challenged the said initial notifications. On 19.04.2000, this court, while issuing notice in the petition in the case of Sunil Goel [being WP(C) 1638/2000] also directed that status quo as regards possession be maintained in the meanwhile. The said stay order operated till 09.07.2007, when the decision of a Division Bench of this court came in the said batch of writ petitions. The Division Bench dismissed all the writ petitions and the interim orders were recalled.