SITA RANI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition, by means of WP (C) No. 2389/1996, had sought quashing of Award No. 21/86-87 dated 12.9.1986 passed by the Land Acquisition Collector (LAC) in respect of her land bearing khasra No. 520 of 487 measuring 0.4 biswas situate in village Ghondali, Krishna Nagar, Delhi - 110051. She also made a prayer not to dispossess her from the said land. It was, inter alia, averred in the writ petition that in April 1982, threats were extended by the officials of the MCD to forcibly dispossess the petitioner from the said plot of land without service of any notice for giving opportunity of hearing. In order to restrain the MCD from resorting to forcible action of dispossession, she had instituted a suit in the civil court. MCD appeared and though it denied the allegation of any attempt to forcibly dispossess the petitioner, at the same time, admitted the ownership of the petitioner over the plot in question. On this basis, vide its judgment dated 26.5.1986, the civil court held that though the petitioner's ownership over the land was not disputed, but since there was no apparent threat from the MCD to forcibly dispossess the petitioner, no action, by way of grant of injunction, was warranted. According to the writ petition, the consideration which weighted with the civil court at the time of passing the judgment dated 26.5.1986 is that, as per the contention of MCD, a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') in respect of 21-B and 17-B had already been issued on 30.11.1981 and the said land was required for public purpose in order to widen the road to have a link road between Krishna Nagar and Ram Nagar.

(2.) After the publication of notice under Section 4, the respondents herein issued notice under Section 6 on 2.4.1982 in respect of land measuring 21 bigha 17 biswas. However, the respondents were required to give and service notice under Sections 9 and 10 of the Act in order to enable the interested persons to file the objections. No such notice was received by the writ petitioner. However, on 29.10.1986, officials of the MCD came at site in order to take possession of the land. At that stage, it transpired that award had been made on 12.9.1986 by the LAC. The perusal of the award indicated that the petitioner's land measuring 0.4 biswas had also been acquired along with the total area of 21 bigha 17 biswas. The writ petitioner, in these circumstances, filed the writ petition challenging the award on various grounds which need not be spelt for the purpose of this order.

(3.) This writ petition came up for hearing on 11.11.1986 and stay of dispossession was granted. This interim Order was extended from time to time. In the year 1993, CM No. 850/1993 was filed by one Vaishno Das Khanna under Order 22, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 claiming that he had purchased the land from the Ms. Sita and his name be substituted. This application was allowed vide orders dated 17.5.1994 impleading Mr. Vaishno Das Khanna as petitioner No.2. When this matter was taken up on 12.8.2002, a Division Bench of this Court noted the arguments of the petitioners that the scheme under which the area was sought to be acquired in order to widen the road and to have a link road between Krishna Nagar and Ram Nagar had been abandoned since the link road between Krishna Nagar and Ram.Nagar was not to be constructed. It was, thus, submitted by the petitioners that due to the changed circumstances, the land was not required for the purpose for which it was sought to be acquired. The Division Bench noted that no reply was filed on this precise point and, therefore, another opportunity was granted to the respondent No.4 to place on record the reply affidavit, failing which it was observed that the court would presume that the land was not required for the said purpose. The respondent No.4 filed affidavit dated 20.11.2002, pursuant to the aforesaid orders, stating as under: