$~

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 17.07.2017 Pronounced on: 24.07.2017 + W.P.(C) 5761/2014 RAM PHAL ..... Petitioner Through : Sh. Charanjit Sharma, Advocate.

versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR ..... Respondents Through : Sh. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate, for L&B/LAC.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT %

1. The petitioner complains of discrimination in the matter of compensation assessed and granted for his land, expropriated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereafter “the Act”) because for the same parcel of land, his co-owner received a higher rate of compensation; he therefore seeks redress under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, by these proceedings.

2. The respondent State (hereafter “NCT”) issued a notification for acquisition of lands which included khasra nos. 116/23/2(3-10), 24(4-16), 25(4-4), 126/3/2(3-10), 4(4-16), 5(4-16), 8(4-16), 9/2(2-16), 12(4-12), 13(4-12), 14(4-12), 16(4-16), 17(4-16), 18(4-16), 19(4-16), 20(4-16), 21(4-16), 22(4-16), 23(4-16), 24/1(3-16), 25/1(3-8), 127/16(4-16), 17/2(3- 16), 24(4-16), 25(4-16), 142/4(4-12), 5(4-12), 6(4-16), 7(4-16), 155/1/1(3- 3), 2(4-8), 3(4-5) and 10(4-3) situated in the revenue estate of Village Bawana, Delhi- (hereafter referred to as “suit lands”), on 15 November, 1996. A declaration confirming that notice, under Section 6, was issued on 21 November, 1996. Based on materials available and evidence led, the Collector assessed the market value of the land, for compensation purposes, in an award dated 02/07/1997 fixing the market value of the land ‘

@ 1,86,500/- (Rs. One Lakh Eight Six Thousand Five Hundred only) per ‘

bigha for "A" category of said acquired land and 1,61,500/- (Rs. One Lakh Sixty One Thousand Five Hundred only) per bigha for "B" category of said acquired land. The petitioner was dissatisfied by this assessment of market value and applied for reference (for higher compensation) to the court, under Section 18. This reference was decided on 3 December 2015 (LAC Case No. 207/2001 re-numbered as 150/2004), the court held that the market value assessed by the Collector was proper and adequate. The petitioner did not pursue the matter further and let it rest.

3. In the meanwhile, the petitioner’s co-owner, i.e., Bhagwana had similarly sought a reference to the court (LAC Case No. 135/2001 re- numbered as 213/2003). The court, in a judgment dated 30 September 2005, too, rejected this reference. Here too, it was held that market value of the ‘

land @ 1,86,500/- (Rs. One Lakh Eight Six Thousand Five Hundred only)

‘

per bigha for "A" category of said acquired land and 1,61,500/- (Rs. One Lakh Sixty One Thousand Five Hundred only) per bigha for "B" categories were justified. However, Bhagwana was not content. He, along with several landowners, appealed to this court (LAA 29-30/2006) which was allowed, partly by common judgment and appeal, when the court disposed of a batch of cases, on 11 May, 2005. This court held that all land-owners were entitled ‘

to a uniform rate of compensation, 1,99,904.68 P per bigha for all kinds of ‘

land thereby resulting in enhancement at the rate of 13,404.68 P per bigha ‘

for Category A land and 38,404.68 per bigha for category 'B' land.

4. The petitioner contends that he is co-owner of suit lands, and refers to the award, as well as the reference court’s order in his case, which he compares with that of Bhagwana’s award and judgment of the reference court, to establish complete identity of suit lands as the subject matter of compensation assessment in both cases. He argues that though Bhagwana was able to appeal to this court, he was not. Citing the judgment of this court, he urges that its existence was unknown to him all the while; when he became aware, he approached this court, by these proceedings. It is urged that having regard to the principles underlying Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, and more importa