ROHITASHWA KUMAR Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has sought the following directions in his writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on 27th April, 1995: "quashing the Chief Commissioner's Notification No.F.15(iii)/59-LSG dated 13th November, 1959 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act and the Lt. Governor's subsequent notification No. F.4(19)/65-L&H dated 9th August, 1966 under Section 6 of the Act in respect of the acquisition of the land including in khasra No.127 situated within the revenue estate of village Oldenpur, Illaqa Shahdara, Delhi and the acquisition proceedings commenced or likely to commence by the Land Acquisition Collector, Delhi in pursuance of the aforesaid notifications:"

(2.) The facts in brief are that the petitioner is owner and in possession of land comprised in Khasra No.127 situate within the revenue estate of village Oldenpur, Illaqa Shahdara, Delhi. A house has been built thereupon bearing Municipal No.1/11324, Gali No.6, Subhash Park Extn., Naveen Shahdara, Delhi-110032. Petitioner claims that the land was purchased by him under a registered Sale Deed dated 29th July, 1970 from Jai Bhagwan Gupta. He was earlier threatened of demolition of his house by the officials of respondents 4 & 5 without due process of law, therefore, he was constrained to file Suit No.374/83 titled as Rohitashwar Kumar v. DDA. In the said suit, it is alleged that in written statement the respondents, inter alia, pleaded that although notifications had been issued under Sections 4 & 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but the property in question had not been acquired. It was also stated that respondents were not going to take any action except by due process of law. Acting on the said undertaking given by the respondents in the written statement that they were not going to take any action except by due process of law, the suit was got dismissed as withdrawn on 31.1.1984. It is stated that again on 22.2.1995 officers of respondents came to the spot and threatened the petitioner of demolition of his house. It is alleged that though notification under Section 4 was issued as far back as on 13.11.1959 and Declaration under Section 6 was made on 9.8.1966, no steps thereafter had been taken to acquire the land. As such the aforementioned directions were sought in the above background.

(3.) After show cause notice, reply was filed by respondent No.4 on the affidavit of Shri Harbans Raj, Director/L.M.I, D.D.A. wherein it is stated that: