RAM CHANDER SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have sought quashing of notification (annexure-P1) dated 13.11.1959 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") along with the declaration made under Section 6 of the Act notified through notification (annexure-P.2) dated 26.12.1962 and award No.1686 (annexure-P.3) dated 20.2.1964 passed by the Collector Land Acquisition with respect to their land ad measuring approximately 3,000 sq. yards comprised in khasra No.165, situate in village Chowkri Mubarkabad, Trinagar, Delhi, in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on 25.2.1994.

(2.) It is alleged that there has been inordinate, unreasonable and un-explained delay on the part of the respondents to complete the acquisition proceedings in as much as the possession has not been taken over so far. None of the petitioners have received any compensation for acquisition of their property. It is alleged that powers conferred upon the respondents under the provisions of the Act have been exercised for extraneous and irrelevant considerations. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled to the relief prayed for, in view of various decisions of the Supreme Court. It is claimed that the petitioners' predecessor Ch.Panna Lal purchased the property in question through sale deed dated 6.2.1963 fromts previous owner Shri Bode son of Muni Singh. Despite issuance of notification under Section 4, which was followed by the declaration under Section 6 of the Act and the award made under Section 11, till date the respondents have not taken any action towards taking possession of the said land from the petitioners or for taking possession of similar adjoining pieces of land from the other land owners. Because of inordinate delay in completing the acquisition process, the entire proceedings have lapsed and the petitioners are entitled to continue in possession and thereby enjoy its ownership, for which purpose the notification and award deserve to be quashed and set aside.

(3.) The petition has been opposed by respondent No.3 by filing its reply on the affidavit of Shri V.K.Single, Director (Land Management) D.D.A. stating that the land in question along with other land was duly acquired for public purpose under the provisions of the Act. Powers were exercised bonafide Acquisition Proceedings are almost complete. Possession could not be taken over as on some portion of the acquired land situate within the Revenue Estate concerned, there were unauthroised houses constructed by some persons. Possession was to be obtained after demolition of unauthroised built up houses. Possession of adjoining pieces of land have already been taken over but for the demolition of certain unauthorised constructions, which had been raised on portion of the adjoining lands, the possession of the petitioners' property could not be taken over. Compensation was to be paid by the Collector, Land Acquisition. Delhi Development Authority was doing whatever was possible within its competence. The mere fact that there has been delay, will not nullify lawful proceedings, which were validly initiated for valid purpose. Learned counsel for the parties were heard.