Riaz Munir Ahmad v. Union Of India & ORS
$~82 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 860/2018 RIAZ MUNIR AHMAD ..... Petitioner Through:
Ms. Tejaswini Verma, proxy counsel for Mr.
Madan Lal Sharma, Advocate.
versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Respondents Through:
Mr. Jamal Akhtar, Advocate.
Mr. Arjun Pant, Advocate for DDA.
Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Advocate with Ms.
Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate for L&B/LAC.
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
O R D E R
% 12.02.2019
1. The prayers in this petition read as under: a) issue a writ of certiorari or any other suitable writ, order, direction in the like nature whereby and whereunder the acquisition proceedings vide award no.20/92-93 dated 19.06.1992 passed by the Land Acquisition Collector, (ML) under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in respect of the land in question of the petitioner comprised of Khasra no. 501 measuring 2 Bigha and 13 Biswas situated in the Revenue Estate of village Madanpur Khadar, New Delhi may be declared to have lapsed in view of the section 24 (2) of Fair Compensation & Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation Act, 2013;
b) to issue writ of mandamus or such other writ or direction in the like nature directing the respondents to restore back and deliver the possession of the aforesaid subject land to the petitioner.
c) the cost of the proceedings may be awarded in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents.
d) to issue such other appropriate writ order or direction which this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
2. According to the narration in the petition, the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ('LAA') was issued on 23rd June 1989 and a declaration under Section 6 of LAA was issued on 22nd June 1990. The Award No. 20/92-93 was passed way back on 19th June 1992. There is no explanation for the inordinate delay in approaching the Court for relief.
3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks leave to withdraw this petition with liberty to file a fresh petition properly explaining the inordinate delay in approaching the Court for relief.
4. Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. S. MURALIDHAR, J.
SANJEEV NARULA, J.
FEBRUARY 12, 2019 ss