Sanjay Kumar Grover and anr. Vs. Union of India and ors.

Sanjay Kumar Grover and anr. vs Union of India and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Nov 03, 2014

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1171813

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1171813
Court: Delhi High Court
Judge: Badar Durrez Ahmed
Decided On: Nov 03, 2014
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sanjay Kumar Grover and anr.

Respondent

Union of India and ors.

Excerpt

.....(hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1894 act’) and in respect of which award no.8/199697 dated 11.12.1996 was made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioners’ land comprised in khasra nos. 24/18 (4-16), 19/1 (0-03), 19/2 (5-01), 21/1 min (3-04), 22 (4-16), 23 (4-16), 29/2 (4-16) and 29/3 (4-16) measuring 32 bighas and 8 biswas in village safipur ranhaula shall be deemed to have lapsed.2. it is an admitted position that neither physical possession of the subject lands has been taken by the land acquiring agency, nor has any compensation been paid to the petitioners. the award was made more than five years prior to the commencement of the 2013 act. all the ingredients of section 24(2) of the 2013 act as interpreted by the supreme court and this court in the following decisions stand satisfied:(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) w.p.(c) no.4681/2014 pune municipal corporation and anr v. harakchand misirimal solanki and ors: (2014) 3 scc183 union of india and ors v. shiv raj and ors: (2014) 6 scc564 sree balaji nagar residential association v. state of tamil nadu and ors: civil appeal no.8700/2013 decided on 10.09.2014; surinder singh vs. union of india and ors.: w.p.(c) 2294/2014 decided 12.09.2014 by this 3. as a result the petitioners are entitled to a declaration that the said acquisition proceedings initiated under the 1894 act in respect of the subject lands are deemed to have lapsed. it is so declared.4. the writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. there shall be no order as to costs. badar durrez ahmed, j v. kameswar rao november3 2014 su

Full Judgment

(I) THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment delivered on:

03. 11.2014 W.P.(C) 4681/2014 and CM No.9329/2014 SANJAY KUMAR GROVER & ANR. ... Petitioners versus ... Respondents UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Petitioner : Mr Raghuvinder Varma For the Respondents : Mr Yeeshu Jain and Ms Jyoti Tyagi for LAC/L&B Mr Amit Mehra for DDA CORAM:HON’BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON’BLE MR JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO JUDGMENT

BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners are seeking the benefit of section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 2013 Act’) which came into effect on 01.01.2014. The petitioners, consequently, seek a declaration that the acquisition proceeding initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 1894 Act’) and in respect of which Award No.8/199697 dated 11.12.1996 was made, inter alia, in respect of the petitioners’ land comprised in Khasra Nos. 24/18 (4-16), 19/1 (0-03), 19/2 (5-01), 21/1 Min (3-04), 22 (4-16), 23 (4-16), 29/2 (4-16) and 29/3 (4-16) measuring 32 bighas and 8 biswas in Village Safipur Ranhaula shall be deemed to have lapsed.

2. It is an admitted position that neither physical possession of the subject lands has been taken by the land acquiring agency, nor has any compensation been paid to the petitioners. The award was made more than five years prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act. All the ingredients of section 24(2) of the 2013 Act as interpreted by the Supreme Court and this Court in the following decisions stand satisfied:(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) W.P.(C) No.4681/2014 Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr v. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors: (2014) 3 SCC183 Union of India and Ors v. Shiv Raj and Ors: (2014) 6 SCC564 Sree Balaji Nagar Residential Association v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors: Civil Appeal No.8700/2013 decided on 10.09.2014; Surinder Singh vs. Union of India and Ors.: W.P.(C) 2294/2014 decided 12.09.2014 by this 3. As a result the petitioners are entitled to a declaration that the said acquisition proceedings initiated under the 1894 Act in respect of the subject lands are deemed to have lapsed. It is so declared.

4. The writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. There shall be no order as to costs. BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J V. KAMESWAR RAO NOVEMBER3 2014 SU

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2014 Same Parties Sanjay Kumar Grover and anr. vs Union of India and ors. Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge Badar Durrez Ahmed