DARYAO SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By these applications, applicants seek review of the order dated 2nd August, 2001, by which the writ petition had been disposed of. The writ petition had been filed on 16th February, 1982, by nearly 366 residents of village Nangal Dewat, seeking quashing of the notification under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, in respect of their lands and structures. Petitioners had also sought restraint on the making and announcing of the award and interference with the possession of their lands and structures situated in village Abadi of and village Nangal Dewat.

(2.) Notices in the writ petition had been issued and the Court had granted a limited stay of operation of the award to enable the Union of India to consider the question of rehabilitation of the residents of Village Nangal Dewat within three months. During the course of proceedings in the writ petition between 1986 to 2001, the Court was informed that the acquisition had been done for the public purpose in extension of Palam Airport International Section. Further, that the Government had initiated the rehabilitation scheme for the residents, whose land had been acquired in village Nangal Dewat and 713 bighas and 2 biswas of land were being acquired in Rangpura village for rehabilitation. In the event the writ petition was disposed of by an order dated 2nd August, 2001, after the counsel appearing for the petitioners had made a statement that the only relief being pressed by him was that petitioners should be rehabilitated at an alternative place.

(3.) The present review applications were thereupon filed by the petitioners, numbering about 270, on the ground that the counsel Mr.B.S.Mann, who made the statement on 2nd August, 2001 was not so authorised to make the statement. The review petition remained pending, since the Court had asked the applicants to file details of their Khasra numbers and the area occupied by each of the review applicants. Thereafter the review applications remained pending, while the Court had been giving directions from time to time with regard to the put in place the rehabilitation scheme and for its implementation. During the course of these proceedings, a Nodal Officer was appointed vide Court order dated 28th April, 2004 and directions had been given to resolve some of the difficulties that have been experienced by various claimants to alternative allotment.