SAROJ BHATNAGAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of india wherein prayer is made for issuance of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ against the respondents for quashing and setting aside the acquisition proceedings initiated after the issuance of notifications under section 4 and Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act and all subsequent proceedings arising thereafter including award dated 7. 9. 2007 in respect of land measuring 445. 85 sq. metres at Circular Road, Shahdara, Delhi in village chandrawali, Shahdara.

(2.) THE facts alleged in the petition are that the petitioners are owners of land measuring 445. 8 sq. meters forming part of Khasra No. 1796/651 min. /1 in village Chandrawali, Shahdara. It is alleged that respondent no. 4 i. e. MCD has been running a veterinary hospital and MCD store on the said piece of land. Petitioners as owners had filed a suit for possession in the year 1991 against the MCD i. e. respondent no. 4 and had obtained decree for possession on 16. 12. 1998 from the court of Ms. Kamini Lau, Civil Judge, Delhi in respect of aforesaid land. It is alleged that respondent authorities, acting in a mala fide and arbitrary manner, to deprive the petitioners from the fruits of decree of possession, issued a notification under Section 4 of Land Acquisition Act dated 13. 1. 2006 proposing to acquire the aforesaid property of the petitioners for public purpose, namely, Veterinary Hospital and MCD store. On 15. 2. 2006, petitioners filed objections under Section 5a of Land Acquisition Act against the issuance of notification under Section 4 of the Act. It is alleged that petitioners also got possession of aforesaid land on the basis of execution proceedings through police aid on 22. 2. 2006 from respondent no. 4. On 15. 6. 2006, declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued by respondents. Notice dated 5. 7. 2006 was issued to petitioners under Section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act for inviting claims regarding compensation. Petitioners had earlier filed writ petition no. 14710-26/2006 challenging notifications under Section 4 and Section 6 of the Act. The said writ petition came up for hearing on 18. 9. 2006 before this Court and the same was disposed of by this Court with the following order:

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner contended that acquisition of land of petitioner was a mala fide exercise of power as the respondent no. 4, MCD having lost a legal battle in a suit for possession for aforesaid property filed by petitioner, got the proceedings initiated for the acquisition of property of petitioners. It is contended that government is already having large tracts of land in the vicinity of land of petitioner as such acquisition for 'public purpose' is only a pretext. It is also contended that land in question is on a busy street of Shahdara which has been declared commercial under New Master Plan of Delhi 2021 and there is no sense in acquiring the said land on a busy commercial road for running the veterinary hospital and medical store.