Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
V. Kameswar Rao, Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, JJ.
Narender & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
P.(C) 752 of 2020, CM Appl. 40589 of 2021 and W.P.(C) 845 of 2020 and W.P.(C) 755 of 2020, CM Appl. 40597 of 2021
Decided On : 07-02-2023
Land Acquisition - Jurisdiction - National Highways Act, 1956 - Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 - [LAND ACQUISITION] - [NH Act, 1956, RFCTFLARR Act, 2013] - The court dismissed the petitions seeking to set aside and quash the land acquisition proceedings and awards passed by the Competent Authority for NHAI as the awards were passed beyond the stipulated period of 12 months. The court held that it did not have jurisdiction to entertain the petitions as no part of the cause of action had arisen within its territorial limits.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought reliefs for setting aside and quashing the land acquisition proceedings including the awards, passed by the Competent Authority based in Saharanpur, as the awards have been passed beyond the stipulated period of 12 months.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that it did not have jurisdiction to entertain the petitions as no part of the cause of action had arisen within its territorial limits.
Issues: The main issue was whether the court had the jurisdiction to entertain the writ petitions, particularly in view of the relief sought by the petitioners.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that cause of action is a bundle of facts taken together with law, in order to give the litigant a right to pursue a lis. Not all facts averred in the pleadings by a party would constitute a part of cause of action. To determine whether an averment of fact made in the pleadings would constitute a part of cause of action, it must be considered whether the fact is actually relevant to the lis.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petitions and connected applications, stating that it did not have jurisdiction to entertain the petitions as no part of the cause of action had arisen within its territorial limits.
JUDGMENT
V. Kameswar Rao, J. (Oral)--As a common issue arises for consideration in the captioned petitions, they are being considered and decided by this common order.
2. The prayers in the writ petitions are the following:
W.P.(C) 752/2020
"a) To issue writ in the nature of mandamus directing thereby for quashing and setting aside the time barred and lapsed Land Acquisition Proceedings and setting aside the award dated 03.07.2018 passed by the Competent Authority for land acquisition for NHAI as the award is passed after the stipulated, period of 12 months as the Land Acquisition proceedings have lapsed.
b) To set aside the land acquisition proceedings as land resettlement and rehabilitation award not been passed under section 31 of Act,
c) To direct respondent no. 1 to 3 to pass the award on resettlement and rehabilitation award as per NRRP Policy and alongwith schedule Two and schedule Three.
d) To set aside the ex parte land acquisition award dated 03.07.20ISpassed against the petitioner without affording an opportunity of hearing before determining the amount of compensation with other material irregularities and infirmities in publication of land acquisition proceedings without site plan and structures and pass and separate individual fresh awards.
e) To direct pass the fresh award, after affording an opportunity of hearing and by complying the provisions of Section 3 (G) (2) and (4) of NH Act, 1956 read with Section 12 and 26 to 30 of RFCTFLARR Act, 2013 for re-determining the amount of compensation, for land as well as resettlement and rehabilitation entitlements, if they (Respondents) want to save the illegal lapsed and ab-inito proceedings and awards
f) To direct respondent no. 1 to re-determine the market value on the basis of the sale deeds mentioned by the petitioner's with other provisions of section 3 G(2) of NH Act (with 10% Amount) and other parameters with interest (Section 28) mentioned in Sections 13, 26 to 30 of the Act for unpaid amounts entitled for parameters with additional interest as directed by the NHAI guidelines also pay the amount of compensation for un-notified land;
g) To direct the all respondents to invite the petitioners to settle the amount of compensation under the chairmanship of Arbitrator/Collector and for settlement of disputes through mediation, conciliation and settlement under section 30 of Arbitration and conciliation Act in stipulated period of time under the supervision this court."
W.P.(C) 755/2020
"a) To issue writ in the nature of mandamus directing thereby for quashing and setting aside the time barred and lapsed Land Acquisition Proceedings and setting aside the award dated 29-4-2016 passed by the Competent Authority for land acquisition for NHAI as the award is passed after the stipulated period of 12 months as the Land Acquisition proceedings have lapsed.
b) To set aside the land acquisition proceedings as land resettlement and rehabilitation award not been passed under section 31 of Act,
c) To direct respondent no. 1 to 3 to pass the award on resettlement and rehabilitation award as per NRRP Policy and alongwith schedule Two and schedule Three.
d) To set aside the ex parte land acquisition award dated 01.03.2016 passed against the petitioner without affording an opportunity of hearing before determining the amount of compensation with other material irregularities and infirmities in publication of land acquisition proceedings without site plan and structures and pass and separate individual fresh awards.
e) To direct pass the fresh award after affording an opportunity of hearing and by complying the provisions of Section 3 (G) (2) and (4) of NH Act, 1956 read with Section 12 and 26 to 30 of RFCTFLARR Act, 2013 for re-determining the amount of compensation, for land as well as resettlement and rehabilitation entitlements, if they (Respondents) want to save the illegal lapsed and ab-inito proceedings and awards
f) To direct respondent no. 1 to re-determine the market value on the basis of
AI
Jurisdiction of the court is determined by whether a part of the cause of action has arisen within its territorial limits.
Timely challenges are essential in land acquisition disputes; relief cannot be granted due to inordinate delay as established by the court's reaffirmation of the principle of laches.
Land acquisition proceedings are invalid if statutory requirements are not met, particularly regarding notifications and timelines, as established by the Land Acquisition Act and the 2013 Act.
Schedule-II deals with elements like provision of housing units in case of displacement, land for land, offer for developed land, choice of Annuity of employment, Subsistence grant for displaced fami....
The competent authority under the National Highways Act lacks jurisdiction to alter or review awarded compensation once finalized, except in limited circumstances defined by statute.
The Acts provide a complete code for land acquisition and disputes. The Central Government must deposit the compensation amount before taking possession of the acquired land. The appointment of a new....
Acquisition of land – Only a person interested can challenge judgment and award passed by Reference Court.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that under Section 24(2) of the Fair Compensation Act, the acquisition proceedings would lapse if the possession of the land was not taken and comp....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
