REENA SURI Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned counsel for respondent Nos. 3 & 4 has handed over the counter affidavit on behalf of the said respondent. The same is taken on record. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to file a rejoinder inasmuch as he would be relying on the averments made in the writ petition.

(2.) By way of this writ petition the petitioner seeks the benefit of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as "the 2013 Act") which came into effect on 01.01.2014. The petitioner, consequently, seeks a declaration that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1894 Act") and in respect of which Award No. 15/1987-88 dated 05.06.1987 was made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioner's land comprised in Khasra No. 1567/2 min measuring 3 bighas and 18 biswas in all in Village Chattarpur shall be deemed to have lapsed.

(3.) In this case, it has been admitted by the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 [Land Acquisition Collector (South)] that physical possession of the subject land has not been taken. This is evident from paragraph 7 of the counteraffidavit filed on behalf of the respondent Nos. 3 & 4. It is, however, contended by the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 that the amount for compensation in respect of the same was deposited in the treasury, though the same has not been paid to the land owner nor was it offered to the land owner.