VANDANA GOEL Vs. LT. GOVERNOR OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia seeks a writ direction, declaring that the acquisition proceedings qua the land admeasuring 5 bighas and 13 biswas comprising Rectangle No. 25 Killa No.9 min. South (2-08),Rectangle No. 25 Killa No.9 min North(2-07), Rectangle No. 25 Killa No.2 min South(0-18) situated in Revenue Estate of Village Deoli, Tehsil Mehrauli, New Delhi (hereinafter 'Suit property'), forming the subject matter of the present petition, have lapsed.

(2.) It is stated in the Petition that Mr. Ashok Muthana, was the recorded owner of the suit property. The above noted property was mortgaged with a bank. Subsequently, due to Mr. Muthana's failure to repay the loan, the bank enforced the mortgage and issued a public notice for auction of the said property under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002. The proceedings under the Securitisation Act reached the Supreme Court and it was directed that the auction sale be conducted under supervision of the Company Court. Thereafter, on 26th September 2011, the bank conducted a public auction and Petitioner was declared the successful bidder, who was handed over possession and sale certificate of the suit property on 31 st January 2012. Subsequently, Petitioner made a request for mutation of the land in her favour and in this regard when Petitioner made enquiries from the Sub- Registrar, she was apprised of the fact that the suit property has been acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 initiated vide Section 4 notification dated 25th November 1980. Petitioner has also annexed copy of the reply of the Tehsildar dated 9th April 2015, to this effect, received by her in furtherance of an RTI application. As per government records, the suit property is still in the name of Ashok Muthana.

(3.) Petitioner contends that owing to promulgation under Section 4 and Section 6 of the repealed Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter 'LAA') the mutation is pending. It is also pleaded that notwithstanding the acquisition proceedings, the possession for the suit property has not been taken over and the compensation of the land has not been paid to the Petitioner, nor deposited in the Reference Court as per Section 31 of the LAA. Therefore, Petitioner is entitled for a declaration under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, (hereinafter referred to as 'the 2013 Act'), to the effect that the acquisition proceedings in respect of the subject land has lapsed. The prayers made in the petition read as under: