MOHD HAROON CHAUDHARY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioners have assailed the acquisition of their land pursuant to the following Orders dated 30.6.2000 passed by the Hon. Lt. Governor of Delhi:

(2.) The Notification dated 13.7.2000 inter alia states that "The Lt. Governor, Delhi is satisfied also that provisions of sub-section (1) of the section 17 of the said Act are applicable to this land and is further pleased under sub-section (4) of the said section to direct that all the provisions of Section 5(A) shall not apply".

(3.) The contention of Mr. Ravindra Sethi, learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner, is that the draft Notification put up to the Hon. Lt. Governor as well as other notings on the file make it abundantly clear that the proposal of the Delhi Government was to invoke the powers contained in Section 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act (LA Act for short). Mr. Sethi argues that since the Hon. Lt. Governor has not made any reference to Section 17(4), but has instead mentioned Section 17(1) alone in his Order, the only inference that can be drawn is that he did not propose to invoke those provisions. It is also Mr. Sethi's contention that unless an Order specifically under Section 17(4) is passed, an opportunity to file Objections under Section 5-A of the LA Act must be given to the Petitioners either by virtue of their being owners, or occupiers or persons interested in the land sought to be acquired.