JAGDISH CHAND Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, it is prayed as under: A direction in the nature of Certiorari be issued for quashing Notification No. F.9 (20) 78-LandB(I) dated 30.6.1988 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act and further to quash Notification No. F.9/44/ 2002/LandB/LA/6840 dated 8.7.2002 issued under Section 6 of the said Act and further to quash the notices issued under Section 9 of the said Act with respect to the land comprised in Khasra No. 1151/3 min. (new) 1665 (old) situated within the Lal Dora of village Mehrauli, New Delhi and to pass such other order that is deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(2.) We have heard Mr. Vijay Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Poddar, learned counsel for the LAC as also Mr. Ajay Verma, learned counsel for the DDA.

(3.) Perusal of the file reveals that on 7.10.2002 the matter came up for hearing for the first time and it appears that at the outset it was prayed that same notification/declaration were in question in the then pending CWP No.4694/2002 and other petitions. Accordingly Rule was issued and the present Petition was directed to be heard along with the said CWP No.4694/2002 which was the lead Petition in a batch of Petitions and status quo was granted in regard to the possession. It is not clear from the order sheets as to how this order was violated and how this Petition was got separated from CWP No.4694/2002 and the batch of petitions raising same questions. We may say that after getting a status quo order by having the petition tagged with a pending matter, it should not have been segregated.