RAM NIWAS Vs. LT GOVERNOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIKRAMAJIT SEN, J. (ORAL) The matter has been heard in detail. The prayers in the writ petition are as follows:-

(2.) The first contention raised by Mr. P.S. Vats, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners, is that the Competent Authority as well as the Appellate Authority has not been appointed by the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation. In this respect, it has been contended by Mr.Shali, learned counsel appearing for the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation, that the provisions of the Metro Railway (Construction of Works) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as `the Metro Act') have not been resorted to. Acquisition is being carried out under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as `the L.A. Act'). Mr. Shali states that as and when the provisions of Metro Act are invoked, the statutory obligation to appoint a Competent Authority as well as an Appellate Authority shall inevitably be fulfilled. We are satisfied with his response.

(3.) The next question which has been raised by Mr.Vats is that Section 30 of the Metro Act gives unlimited powers to D.M.R.C. to acquire lands much in excess of their needs. Acquisition can, therefore, be carried out in a malafide in order to annihilate the rights of the owners and thereafter make large profits for the D.M.R.C. As has already been explained, Section 30 of the Metro Act has not been resorted to. The acquisition of lands has taken place under the L.A. Act.