Back
2016 Supreme(Del) 3953
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
JAL KAUR EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY & ORS. - Petitioners
Versus
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. - Respondents
W.P.(C) 4853/2013 & C.M. No.3596/2014
Decided On : 02-11-2016
For the Petitioners: Mr. Prakash Gautam and Mr. Vivek Ojha.
For the Respondents: Ms. Shobhna Takiar, for Mr. Naushad Ahmed Khan, for Mr. S.D. Windlesh.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of consistent claims and the dismissal of a plea that contradicts previous assertions, as well as the finality of completed acquisition proceedings.
Headnote:
Land Acquisition Act - Acquisition of Land - Section 4, Section 6 - Summary: The court discussed the acquisition of land under Section 4 and Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, the completion of acquisition proceedings, and the dismissal of challenges to the acquisition. The court highlighted the petitioner's consistent claim that the land falls in Village Lado Sarai and the rejection of their plea that the land falls in Lado Sarai Extension. The court found the petition without merit and dismissed it with costs.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a registered society, claimed that their land in Lado Sarai Extension was pending regularization, while the respondents contended that the land had been acquired and allotted to a hospital. The petitioner sought to prohibit the respondents from demolishing or dispossessing their structures on the land.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's consistent claim was that the land falls in Village Lado Sarai, and their plea that it falls in Lado Sarai Extension was a recent development. The court dismissed the petition, noting that the acquisition proceedings had been completed, and the petitioner had misused the court process by filing multiple litigations.
Issues: The main issue was the status of the land in Lado Sarai Extension and the petitioner's claim for regularization against the respondents' contention of completed acquisition and allotment to a hospital.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the petitioner's consistent claim that the land falls in Village Lado Sarai and the rejection of their plea that it falls in Lado Sarai Extension. The court also noted the completion of acquisition proceedings and the dismissal of challenges to the acquisition.
Final Decision: The petition was found without merit and dismissed with costs quantified at Rs.25,000/-.
INDERMEET KAUR, J.
1. Petitioner before this Court is Jal Kaur Educational Socierty, a society registered under the Societies Registration Act. The petition has been filed through its Chairman.
2. The contention in the petition is that a colony namely Lado Sarai Extension came into existence in the year 1908. On 13.11.1059 a Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) was issued for acquiring total land measuring 24 bighas situated in Village Lado Sarai, Tehsil Mehrauli, New Delhi. A declaration under Section 6 of the the said Act was issued qua this land on 16.6.1966. Petitoner nos.2 to 4 had constructed their builing on their respective land earmarked as 225-A, 225-B and 225-C in the year 1974-75. The khasra Girdwari also noted that this land belongs to the petitioners. The Award was passed on 19.6.1980. Compensation had not been taken by the petitioners. In the year 1982 writ petition No.1189/1982 was filed by the residents of village Lado Sarai. These proceedings were dismissed on 14.12.1995. The SLP (No.3434/1996) filed against the order of the Bench of the High Court was dismissed on 01.11.1996. Pursuant to the direction of the Apex Court the representation dated 08.4.1997 was filed by the petitioner nos.2 to 4 before the DDA.
3. In the year 1997, the erstwhile father of the petitioners had also filed a suit (Civil Suit No.1619/1997). This suit sought a prayer that the representation dated 08.4.1997 filed by the petitioners be considered accordingly.
4. Petitoner no.1 is running a school at the aforenoted site since the year 2002. Recognition had also been granted to the school by the MCD on 18.9.2002. His application seeking regularization is also pending before the Competent Authority.
5. Additional submission as is borne out from the writ petition is that the order of respondent no.2/Government of NCT of Delhi concerning unauthorized colonies was issued on 12.12.2007 wherein the name of Lado Sarai Extension figures at serial no.483 in the list of Unauthorized Colonies which are pending regularization.
6. Meanwhile the suit (Suit No.1619/1997) already filed by the father of the petitioners no.2 to 4 was dismissed by the Trial Court on 04.6.2010. The RFA (No.579/2010) was preferred by the petitioners which was also disposed of on 09.7.2013. Submission of the petitioners is that the respondents are hell bent upon to take coercive steps against the property of the petitioners in spite of the fact that the Lado Sarai Extension Colony is yet pending regularization before the Competent Authority. This writ petition was accordingly filed in July, 2013.
7. Respondent no.1/DDA has filed a reply/response. Submission is that the petitioner has no legs to stand on. The case of the petitioners from the very inception is that this land falls in Village Lado Sarai. The area in question is in fact Lado Sarai and not Lado Sarai Extension as is the plea of the petitioners taken by them only in this petition. This plea was never emanated earlier. Submission is that this land already stands acquired under the Land Acquisition Act and has been taken over for a planned development of Delhi and it had in fact been allotted to Shanti Memorial Hospital in the year 1997. This land cannot be regularized as the acquisition proceedings qua this land have been completed and allotment in favour of the aforenoted hospital has already been taken place. The act of the petitioners in challenging the acquisition proceedings has been dismissed right up to the Apex Court. The petitioners are only land grabbers and they are not entitled to any protection.
8. The stand of respondent no.2/GNCTD in their counter affidavit is that the Lado Sarai Extension is an unauthorized colony. Two Residents’ Welfare Associations i.e. Lado Sarai Extension Welfare Association and Lado Sarai Welfare and Cultural Association have submitted their layout plan for regularization of unauthorized colony against registration n
