MOTI LAL JAIN Vs. LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioner claims to be the owner of land measuring 20 bighas 7 biswas situated in village Bahapur, New Delhi. By this writ petition he seeks to challenge an Award No.7/97-98 dated 12.12.1997 issued by the Land Acquisition Collector (LAC) pursuant to a notification dated 13.11.1959 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894('Act') and a declaration dated 9.9.1963 under Section 6 of the Act. The LAC followed the judgment of this Court in RFA No. 463 of 1969 (Chajju v. Union of India) in respect of the same notification and computed the compensation payable at the rate of Rs.19,000/- per bigha.

(2.) The petitioner's case is that on 10.5.1974 he had filed a writ petition being Civil Writ No. 621 of 1974 in this Court challenging the said notification dated 13.11.1959 under Section 4 of the Act. Following the judgment dated 5.12.1977 passed by this Court in a connected Civil Writ No. 721 of 1974, (Scindia Potteries Private Limited v. Union of India), the petitioner's writ petition was also allowed by the learned Single Judge on 5.12.1977. The petitioner contends that consequent upon the said judgment dated 5.12.1977, the land of the petitioner became free from the acquisition proceedings. Sometime in January 2003, since the Respondent No.2 DDA had merged the land of the petitioner with their land, the petitioner moved an application before the Tehsildar Kalkaji for making a demarcation " of the unacquired land of the petitioner". It is averred that thereafter in the last week of January 2004, the petitioner received an intimation from the Tehsildar Kalkaji that the land of the petitioner stood acquired by the award dated 12.12.1997 and therefore, the demarcation could not be made. In the petitioner's own words in Para 14 of the present writ petition, "the petitioner was shocked to learn about the alleged acquisition proceedings, as he had not received any notice of the same." The petitioner claims that he engaged a counsel and got inspected the file of the Award No.7/97-98, and obtained a copy which is annexed to the writ petition as Annexure P-12. The petitioner maintains that he was completely unaware of issuance of the said Award since no notice was issued to him under Sections 9 and 10 of the Act.

(3.) Initially by a judgment dated 20.5.2004, the Division Bench of this Court allowed the petitioner's present writ petition and quashed the impugned award. Later, a Review Petition being RA No. 247 of 2004 was filed by the Respondents, and the said order dated 20.5.2004 was recalled and the present writ petition was restored to file.