ISHAT E-ISLAM TRUST Vs. DELHI ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 14.7.1980 a notification was issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Act) notifying the petitioner"s lands located in Village Okhla, Delhi for acquisition for the planned development of Delhi. Following this a notification dated 29.4.1981, being a declaration under Section 6 of the Act, came to be issued.

(2.) This writ petition was filed in May 1981 seeking the quashing of the notifications dated 14.7.1980 and 29.4.1981. The Khasra Nos. of the lands of the petitioner as mentioned in the petition, and in particular in the prayer clause, were Khasra Nos. 233, 234, 236, 238, 244, 413/237, 414/237, 425/239 and 426/239 situated in Village Okhla. Significantly, Khasra No. 232, in respect of which both the notifications dated 14.7.1980 and 29.4.1981 were issued, did not find a mention either in the petition or in the prayer clause. The second significant aspect was that out of the Khasra Nos. mentioned in the S. 4 notification, the notification dated 29.4.1981 under Section 6 of the Act only referred to Khasra Nos. 232, 233, 234, 236, 238 and 244. In other words, the acquisition proceedings in respect of Khasra Nos. 413/237, 414/237, 425/239 and 426/239, which were mentioned in the S.4 notification dated 14.7.1980 were not proceeded with at the s.6 stage.

(3.) On 20.5.1981, at the first hearing of the writ petition, Rule DB was issued and the following interim order was passed: "Stay of further proceedings in pursuance to the impugned notification under Section 4 and declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act." Thus, the stay granted by the Court on 20.5.1981 was in respect of Khasra Nos. mentioned by the petitioner in the writ petition and covered by the notification dated 29.4.1981 under Section 6 of the Act. In other words, the stay was of the land acquisition proceedings in respect of the petitioner"s lands in Khasra Nos. 233, 234, 236, 238 and 244. At the next date of hearing on 29.7.1981, since no counter affidavit had been filed by the respondents by then, the interim order was made absolute.