NAND KISHORE Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions challenge the Order dated 3.1.2006 passed by the Land Acquisition Collector (LAC), North West, Khanjawala, Delhi, Respondent No. 2. The said order reads as under:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_282_DRJ94_2007Html1.htm</FRM>

(2.) The brief facts leading to the above Order are that an Award No. 15/2005-06ADC)NW was made by the LAC (NW) on 23.9.2005 in respect of lands measuring 1440 bigha 4 biswa in village Holambi Kalan, Delhi. The petitioners 1 and 2 herein as well as Respondent No. 4 filed their claims before the LAC in respect of certain lands. The LAC has, in the Award, determined that a sum of Rs. 56,98,412.87 is to be paid to Respondent No. 4 Om Prakash, son of Sh. Malkhan in respect of his 1/3 share in land bearing Khasra Nos.63 and 64, and further that a sum of Rs. 56,98,412.87 to be paid to Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 in respect of their 1/3 shares each in the aforementioned lands. The admitted position is that the aforementioned determined amounts were subsequently paid to the Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 and Respondent No. 4. The petitioners herein on 26.11.2005 filed objections before the LAC stating that Respondent No. 4 Om Prakash should be paid compensation only for 3 bighas of acquired land and not for the 1/3 share of the land as determined in the Award. This objection appears to have been received by the LAC on 2.1.2006. The petitioners contend that without waiting for the reply on the said objection from the Respondent No. 4, the LAC on 3.1.2006 passed the aforementioned order requiring both the parties to deposit the compensation paid to them.

(3.) Mr. Varun Goswami, the learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the impugned order dated 3.1.2006 passed by the LAC is vitiated in law in so far as it requires the petitioners to pay back the compensation received by them, particularly when neither Respondent No. 4 nor any other person has raised any objection as regards the petitioners' entitlement to compensation. He further submits that there was no power in the LAC to require the petitioners to pay back the compensation as a pre-condition to making a reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Act) to the civil court for adjudication of the rival claims.