Tarun Mittal v. Union Of India & ANR.

$~38 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 8852/2015 TARUN MITTAL ..... Petitioner Through:

None.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Arjun Pant, Advocate for DDA.

Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel for LAC/L&B with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

O R D E R

% 02.09.2019

1. None appears for the Petitioner when the matter is called up.

2. Learned counsel for the Respondent states that the present petition is delayed and is barred by laches. She points out that the acquisition in the present case under the Land Acquisition Act 1894 was initiated on 13.11.1959 with the issuance of the notification under Section 4 of the Act. The declaration under Section 6 was made on 10.03.1996 and the Land Acquisition Collector made the award on 27.02.1970.

3. The Petitioner did not challenge the said acquisition proceedings and has sought to make his claim only on account of the passing of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 w.e.f. 01.01.2014. There is also no explanation of

the delay in filing the present petition

4. In light of the aforesaid, since there is no appearance on behalf of the Petitioner, we dismiss the present petition. We, however, grant liberty to the Petitioner to re-file the petition, if so advised, after properly explaining the delay and laches.

VIPIN SANGHI, J SANJEEV NARULA, J SEPTEMBER 02, 2019 ss