Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Government Of Nct Of Delhi vs Harinder Kaushik on 13 July, 2022
Author: A.M. Khanwilkar
Bench: A.M. Khanwilkar
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022
(Arising out of SLP(C) No. of 2022)
[Diary No. 18537 of 2020]
GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
HARINDER KAUSHIK & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
Despite service, no appearance has been entered on behalf of private respondent(s).
Delay condoned.
Leave granted.
This appeal takes exception to the judgment and order dated 05.01.2018 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in WP(C) No.8784/2015, whereby the High Court has declared that the acquisition proceedings in respect of subject land had lapsed in terms of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, ‘the 2013 Act’). Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by DEEPAK SINGH Date: 2022.07.16 12:57:44 IST Reason:
The short question involved in this appeal is whether the declaration given by the High Court of 2 lapsing of subject land acquisition proceedings can be sustained despite the factual position emerging from the record that possession of the subject land has been taken over by the competent authority on 14.07.1987.
In light of this indisputable fact, the question of giving any relief to the respondent(s)-writ petitioner(s) does not arise in terms of the exposition of the Constitution Bench in Indore Development Authority vs. Manoharlal & Ors., reported in (2020) 8 SCC 129. Hence, the impugned judgment and order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.
Consequently, the writ petition(s) filed by the private respondent(s) before the High Court stands dismissed.
Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of.
…...................J (A.M. KHANWILKAR) …...................J (J.B. PARDIWALA) New Delhi July 13, 2022 3 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. of 2022) [Diary No. 28442 of 2020] GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI APPELLANT(S) VERSUS DHOOM SINGH & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R Despite service, no appearance has been entered on behalf of private respondent(s).
Delay condoned.
Leave granted.
This appeal takes exception to the judgment and order dated 21.12.2017 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in WP(C) No.1281 of 2015, whereby the High Court has declared that the acquisition proceedings in respect of subject land had lapsed in terms of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, ‘the 2013 Act’).
The short question involved in this appeal is whether the declaration given by the High Court of 4 lapsing of subject land acquisition proceedings can be sustained despite the factual position emerging from the record that possession of the subject land has been taken over by the competent authority on 26.04.2008.
In light of this indisputable fact, the question of giving any relief to the respondent(s)-writ petitioner(s) does not arise in terms of the exposition of the Constitution Bench in Indore Development Authority vs. Manoharlal & Ors., reported in (2020) 8 SCC 129. Hence, the impugned judgment and order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.
Consequently, the writ petition(s) filed by the private respondent(s) before the High Court stands dismissed.
Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of.
…...................J (A.M. KHANWILKAR) …...................J (J.B. PARDIWALA) New Delhi July 13, 2022 5 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. of 2022) [Diary No. 2522 of 2021] DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS DAYA SINGH & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R Delay condoned.
Leave granted.
This appeal takes exception to the judgment and order dated 17.08.2017 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in WP(C) No.11464 of 2015, whereby the High Court has declared that the acquisition proceedings in respect of subject land had lapsed in terms of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (for short, ‘the 2013 Act’).
From the impugned judgment, it is noticed that the High Court essentially proceeded on the basis of the decisions of this Court which have now been either reversed or explained by the Constitution Bench in the 6 case of Indore Development Authority vs. Manoharlal & Ors. reported in (2020) 8 SCC 129.
As a result, it would be appropriate that parties are relegated before the High Court for reconsideration of the matter afresh in light of the decision of the Constitution Bench.
There is some controversy in respect of factum of possession. According to the appellant, possession was taken before the cut-off date; whereas the respondent would contend that it is only a paper possession taken one day before the cut-off date.
As we are inclined to relegate the parties before the High Court, we do not express any opinion either way on these pleas taken by the parties, including on the factum of compensation amount deposited by the authority is sufficient or substantial compliance of the requirement of payment of compensation in terms of the Constitution Bench judgment.
Accordingly, the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court is set aside.
We are informed that some more matters are remanded to the High Court arising from the same notification. Presently, those cases are notified for 17.08.2022. 7 It will be open to the parties to request the High Court to list this remanded writ petition alongwith those cases on the same date.
All contentions available to the parties are left open.
The appeal(s) stand disposed of in the above terms. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
…...................J (A.M. KHANWILKAR) …...................J (J.B. PARDIWALA) New Delhi July 13, 2022 8 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. of 2022) [Diary No. 28452 of 2020] UNION OF INDIA APPELLANT(S) VERSUS RAM KISHAN & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2022 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.8476 OF 2019) O R D E R Delay condoned.
Leave granted.
These appeals take exception to the judgment and order dated 11.07.2017 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in WP(C) Nos. 4607 of 2015, whereby the High Court has declared that the acquisition proceedings in respect of Khasra No. 410/305 admeasuring 8 Bighas and 11 Biswas in the Revenue Estate of Village Chilla Saroda Bangar, Delhi had lapsed in terms of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement 9 Act, 2013 (for short, ‘the 2013 Act’).
The High Court has noted that possession of the subject land has been taken over on 01.10.1982 but granted relief to the respondents on the finding that there was no record to indicate that the compensation in respect of the subject land had already been paid to the owner/land user.
Considering the finding on the factum of possession, in light of the Constitution Bench in Indore Development Authority vs. Manoharlal & Ors., reported in (2020) 8 SCC 129, no relief could be granted to the respondents much less declaration of lapsing of acquisition proceedings in respect of subject matter.
As regards the factum of compensation, it is for the respondents/writ-petitioners to pursue appropriate remedy as may be advised which will have to be decided on its own merits and in accordance with law.
This does not mean that we are accepting the plea of the respondents that the compensation amount has not been deposited/paid by the concerned authority as required in terms of decision of the Constitution Bench referred to above. That is a matter to be examined by the concerned Forum, as and when occasion arises. 10 However, we may record the argument of learned counsel for the appellant that the compensation amount has been received by the co-owner(s).
Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the structure standing on the land have since been regularized. We are not required to examine this contention in the present proceedings. It is open to the respondent to resort to appropriate remedy, if so advised.
Taking overall view of the matter, we have no hesitation in setting aside the impugned judgment and order and dismissing the writ petition(s) as filed by the respondents with observations noted hitherto. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed in the above terms.
Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of.
…...................J (A.M. KHANWILKAR) …...................J (J.B. PARDIWALA) New Delhi July 13, 2022 11 ITEM NO.10+20 COURT NO.3 SECTION XIV S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 18537/2020 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05-01-2018 in WP(C) No. 8784/2015 passed by the High Court Of Delhi At New Delhi) GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI Petitioner(s) VERSUS HARINDER KAUSHIK & ORS. Respondent(s) (IA No. 96014/2020 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING, IA No. 84480/2021-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES, IA No. 84471/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) WITH Diary No(s). 28442/2020 (XIV) (IA No. 5276/2021 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING, IA No. 5277/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 84489/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Diary No(s). 2522/2021 (XIV) (IA No. 17150/2021 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 17151/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No. 17152/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Diary No(s). 28452/2020 (XIV) (IA No. 5724/2021 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING, IA No. 84487/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Diary No(s). 6981/2021 (XIV) (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 42155/2021 IA No. 42155/2021 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING) SLP(C) No(s). 8476/2019 (IA No. 47752/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No. 146452/2019 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 4956/2020 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES IA No. 146451/2019 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES) Date : 13-07-2022 These matters were called on for hearing today. 12 CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.B. PARDIWALA For Petitioner(s) Ms. Astha Tyagi, AOR Ms. Arti Singh, AOR Mr. Aakashdeep Singh Roda, Adv. Ms. Pooja Singh, Adv.
Mr. Basant Pal Singh, Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Deepika V. Marwaha, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Vinay Kumar Shailendra, Adv. Mr. Chandra Bhushan, Adv. Ms. Worthing Kasar, Adv. Ms. Raunika Johar, Adv.
Mr. Saksham Maheshwari, Adv. Mr. Jagjit Singh Chhabra, AOR Ms. Uttara Babbar, AOR Mr. Anirudh Ramakrishnan, Adv. Ms. Shipra Jain, Adv.
Ms. Smita Maan, AOR Ms. Astha Tyagi, AOR Mr. Dinesh Chander Trehan, Adv. Ms. Neha Tripathi, Adv.
Ms. Binu Tamta, AOR Mr. Ashwani Kumar, AOR Mr. A. Raghuvanshi, Adv. Ms. Kumud Nijhawan, Adv. Mr. Anshay Dhatwalia, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Diary Nos. 18537 and 28442 of 2020 Delay condoned.
Leave granted.
The appeals are allowed in terms of the signed orders. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. 13 Diary No(s). 2522/2021 and 28452 of 2020 and SLP(C) No. 8476 of 2019 Delay condoned.
Leave granted.
The appeals are disposed of in terms of the signed orders.
Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. Diary No. 6981 of 2021 As requested by learned counsel for the respondent No. 6, list this matter along with Diary No. 17623 of 2021.
(DEEPAK SINGH) (VIDYA NEGI) COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
[Four signed orders are placed on the file]