High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/5/2018

Parasu Ram And ORS. v. Union Of India And ANR.

2019-09-30Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Vipin Sanghi,Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Sanjeev Narula2 pages

$~36 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 5/2018 PARASU RAM AND ORS.

..... Petitioners Through:

versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Adv. With Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advs. for L& B/LAC.

Mr. Dhanesh Relan, standing counsel for DDA with Mr.Paritosh Dhawan and Ms.Gauri, Advs.

CORAM:

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

O R D E R

% 30.09.2019

1. None appears on behalf of the petitioners when the matter was called out. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition seeking to the following reliefs:

"It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon Court may be pleased to issue a writ / order / direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the records of the acquisition proceedings with respect to the lands comprised in Khasra No. 119 (2-14), situated in the revenue estate of village Chilla Saroda Bangar, Delhi acquired vide Award No.52-E/71-72 pronounced on 23.03.1973 and further to pass appropriate writ, order or directions declaring the acquisition proceedings to have lapsed and have become inoperative under sec.24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act of 2013 as neither possession of the lands of the petitioner have been taken nor

compensation with respect to lands have been paid." 2.

The acquisition in the present writ petition was initiated by the notification dated 13.11.1959, issued under Section 4 of Land Acquisition Act, followed by a notification under Section 6 of the said act dated 20.06.1966. The award in question was pronounced on 23.03.1973.

3. The present petition was filed only in December, 2017. Thus, there is considerable delay and laches in filing the present writ petition. In similar matters, we have permitted the petitioners to withdraw the writ petitions with liberty to file afresh petition, after explaining the delay and laches.

4. In the interest of justice, we adopt the same course of action, the petition stands dismissed with liberty to file afresh petition explaining the delay and laches.

VIPIN SANGHI, J SANJEEV NARULA, J SEPTEMBER 30, 2019 Pallavi