Sandeep Kumar v. Government Of NCT Of Delhi & ORS

$~31 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 3259/2018 SANDEEP KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Lalit Kumar Rawal, Advocate.

versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents Through:

Ms. Nazia Parveen, Advocate for Mr.

Sanjeev Sagar, Standing Counsel for DDA.

Mr.

Chiranjeev Kumar, Advocate with Mr.

Mukesh Sachdeva, Advocate for UOI.

Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Advocate with Ms.

Shilpi Choudhary, Advocate for LAC & L&B.

CORAM:

JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R

% 23.01.2019

1. The prayer in this petition reads as under: "a). Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other suitable writ, order or direction in the like nature thereby directing the respondents to pay suitable commercial compensation in respect agricultural land the petitioner is entitled 1/8 share in land comprised Khasra No. 31/1 ( 04-17) & 32 (04-10) total, land measuring 09 Bigha 07 Biswas (i.e. 01 Bigha 04 Biswas share of the petitioner) Situated in the Revenue Estate of Village Khanpur Dhani, Shahdra, Delhi-arising out of award No. 1167 dated 13/07/1961

in view of the provisions of Section 24(2) of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

(b) To pay all benefits/alternative plots/Industrial plot/DDA flat etc. admissible under the law in view of the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.

Pass such other and further order/direction as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be allowed in favour of the petitioner."

2. According to the narration in the petition, the notification under Section 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ('LAA') was issued on 16th March, 1961. The impugned Award No. 1167 was passed way back on 13th July 1961.

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 Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.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 JANUARY 23, 2019 ss