$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 15233/2025 & CM APPL. 62443/2025 SURINDER PAL SINGH & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Ms. Akansha Kaul, Advocate with Mr. Shailender Saini, Advocates.

versus GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH ITS SECRETARY & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Standing Counsel for R-1 and R- 2 with Mr. Sunil Kumar Jha, Advocates.

Ms. Manika Tripathy, SC for DDA along with Ms. Gauhaur Yadav and Mr. Aakash Mohan, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

O R D E R

% 26.11.2025

1. The matter is being taken up today as in view of notification No.35/G-4/Genl.-I/DHC dated 24^th November 2025; 25^th November 2025 has been declared a holiday on account of 350^th anniversary of ‘Guru Teg Bahadur’s Martyrdom Day’.

2. This petition has been filed challenging the Public Notice dated 31^st July 2025 issued under Section 21 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 (‘Act of 2013’), with respect to the land described in the prayer clause. For ease of reference the said prayer is extracted as under:

“a. Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order quashing and setting aside the impugned public notice dated 31.07.2025 issued under Section 21 of the New Land Acquisition Act, 2013 in respect of the Petitioner land comprised in Khasra no. 1403 (04) to the extent 4 biswas situated in Village Tihar, New Delhi;

b. Issue a writ of prohibition restraining the Respondents from taking any coercive steps or proceeding further with the contemplated acquisition of the Petitioner’s land;

c. Declare that any acquisition proceedings in respect of the Petitioner’s land have lapsed under Section 24(2) of the RFCTLARR Act, 2013;

d. Pass such other order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the Apex Court in the matter of Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. BSK Realtors LLP (2024) 7 SCC 370, has issued directions in paragraph 58 and that the matter was listed as a part of Serial No. 36 in Group B1 in the Annexure by the Supreme Court in Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. BSK Realtors LLP (supra) or DDA v.

Tejpal & Ors(2024) 7 SCC 433 of the said judgement.

4. The categorization is evident from the following Annexure which forms part of the judgement in Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. BSK Realtors LLP (supra) or DDA v. Tejpal & Ors. (supra):

5. Learned counsel for petitioner claims that, deviating from the scheme as prescribed under the Act of 2013, the Apex Court has fixed a schedule in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (‘Constitution’), and the schedule should have been adhered to by the respondents.

6. It is claimed that the Public Notice issued under Section 21 of the Act of 2013 is sans the schedule prescribed and, as such, attracts the consequences under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 for not completing the acquisition proceedings within schedule.

7. It is the contention of the counsel for petitioners that the schedule, since it is in deviation from the statutory provisions, i.e .Act of 2013 and is fixed in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, has a mandatory effect and, as a sequel, the notice under Section 21 of the Act of 2013 stands vitiated.

8. Counsel for petitioner seeks same direction that has been passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 11820/2025 titled as “Lokesh Lochav & Anr.

v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

9. Pursuant to order dated 03^rd November 2025, counsel for petitioner to file has handed over a flow chart to this Court to establish their title. The flow chart indicates that the subject land was originally purchased by Smt. Krishna Wanti, which devolved upon Mr. Mohinder Singh Anand and the remaining half upon Smt. Harbans Kaur, Mr. Surinder Pal Singh (petitioner no. 1) and Mr. Surjeet Singh Anand (petitioner no. 2). Mr. Mohinder Singh Anand passed a