ANITA GUPTA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition to assail the notification dated 28.04.1995 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, and subsequent declaration dated 26.04.2013 under Section 6 of the said Act, and all acquisition proceedings, including the award, if passed, in respect of Khasra No.305 admeasuring 1 Bigha and 1.5 Biswa in the revenue estate of Village Shahbad Daulatpur, Delhi on the ground that the acquisition had lapsed due to the failure on the part of the competent authority of the respondents to issue the notification/ declaration under Section 6 of the said Act within the stipulated period of one year from the date of judgment dated 21.03.2012 passed by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 3022-3023/2013 titled Prahlad Vihar Resident Association & Others Vs. Union of India & Others.

(2.) The petitioner claims to be the recorded owner in respect of the aforesaid land by virtue of sale deed dated 22.05.1985 in her favour. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner's land, along with other adjoining lands, was notified under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act on 28.04.1995. The notification also invoked Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act and, consequently, the right of the petitioner to file objections under Section 5A of the Act was deprived. The declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 26.04.1996. The Prahlad Vihar Resident Association and Others filed writ petition before this Court assailing the said notification under Section 4 of the Act and the subsequent declaration under Section 6 of the Act. On 09.07.2007, the writ petition being W.P.(C.) No. 3938/1996 was dismissed by this Court. The matter was carried to the Supreme Court, which rendered its decision in the aforesaid Civil Appeals. The Supreme Court quashed the declaration under Section 6 of the Act and directed the Competent Authority to invite objections under Section 5A of the Act pursuant to the notification under Section 4 of the Act dated 28.04.1995, and proceed in accordance with law. The fresh declaration under Section 6 of the Act was, however, issued only on 26.04.2013. The same was beyond the period of one year from the date of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Civil Appeals No.3022-3023/2012, which was rendered on 21.03.2012. Consequently, the case of the petitioner is that the said declaration was beyond the period of limitation prescribed by clause (ii) of the proviso to Section 6 of the Act, and the acquisition lapsed.

(3.) The further submission of the petitioner is that one Sunil Goel filed W.P.(C.) No. 3049/2013 to assail the fresh declaration under Section 6 of the Act dated 26.04.2013. That writ petition was allowed by this Court on 29.04.2014. The other petitions preferred before this Court were also allowed by this Court, particulars whereof are also disclosed in the petitions. Thus, the case of the petitioner is that there is no valid acquisition of the petitioner's land till date. Learned counsel further submits that no award has been made in respect of the petitioner's land and no compensation paid.