(1.) THE present writ petition is filed by the petitioners praying inter alia for quashing the order dated 20. 07. 1989, passed by the Financial Commissioner, dismissing the revision petition preferred by the petitioners and respondent no. 3 collectively, whereunder, the order dated 18. 05. 1989 passed by the additional Collector confirming the order of the learned SDM, Punjabi Bagh, which held that the transfer of the land, subject matter of consideration in the present writ petition, situated in the revenue estate of village Dhansa, by respondent No. 3 in favour of the petitioners was violative of the provisions of Section 33 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act' ).
(2.) IN a nutshell, the facts of the case are that the respondent No. 3 (appellant No. 1 in the revision petition), was a Bhumidhar and in possession of land measuring 33 Bighas 12 Biswas situated within the revenue estate of village Dhansa, Delhi. He agreed to sell his entire holdings to his nephew, petitioner No. 1 and his daughter, petitioner No. 2. It is stated that prior to the respondent No. 3 applying to the competent authority under the Delhi Land (Restrictions on Transfer) Act,1972, for grant of a No Objection Certificate with regard to the land in question, part of the land comprising in Killas No. 100/12 and 100/19 was notified under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act vide notification dated 25. 02. 1981, issued by the respondent No. 1 on the ground that the said land was required for a public purpose, namely, extension of najafgarh Drain. Insofar as the remaining parcel of land was concerned, respondent No. 3 obtained a No Objection Certificate from the competent authority and sold the entire land in favour of the petitioners by executing two separate sale deeds on the same date, i. e. , on 07. 05. 1984.
(3.) ON 25. 07. 1984, the SDM, Punjabi Bagh issued a notice under Section 33 of the Act in respect of the aforesaid land sold by the respondent No. 3 on 07. 05. 1984 by virtue of two separate sale deeds in favour of the petitioners. In the meantime, the notification dated 25. 02. 1981 under Section 6 of the Land acquisition Act, in respect of the parcel of land stood lapsed in January 1987. Immediately thereafter, the respondent No. 3 applied for a No Objection certificate from the competent authority and after receiving the same, executed a sale deed in respect of the remaining land in favour of the petitioner No. 2 by executing a sale deed dated 20. 01. 1987.