Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Satish Kumar vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors on 29 January, 2024

Author: Tushar Rao Gedela

Bench: Tushar Rao Gedela

                                    $~28
                                    *           IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                    +           W.P.(C) 9052/2020
                                                SATISH KUMAR                                                                     ..... Petitioner
                                                                                      Through:                 Mr. S.N. Gupta with Mr. Pankaj
                                                                                                               Vivek, Advocates.

                                                                                      versus

                                                GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.             ..... Respondents
                                                              Through: Mr. Rishikesh Kumar, ASC with Ms.
                                                                        Sheenu Priya and Mr. Ankit Gill,
                                                                        Advocates for GNCTD.

                                                CORAM:
                                                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
                                                             ORDER

% 29.01.2024 (The proceeding has been conducted through Hybrid Mode)

1. This is a writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking, inter alia, the following reliefs: -

"a) pass a writ of certiorari/mandamus, order or direction, thereby quashing the proceedings alongwith the order dated 27.10.2020 passed by Respondent No.2 on the application of respondent No.4, 5 and 6 seeking passage for their house by reviewing the consolidation proceedings stood concluded on 19.05.1998;
b) pass such other or further order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents, in the interest of justice."

2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is one of the co-

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/02/2024 at 23:32:01 owners along with other family members in respect of a plot of land admeasuring 2 bigha 14 biswas (2700 sq. yds) pertaining to khasra no.144/41/2/2 situated in the revenue estate of village Kanjhawala, Delhi - 110081, which is stated to have been purchased under registered Sale Deeds dated January and June, 2013. The draft scheme for village Kanjhawla for consolidation was announced under Section 19 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 on 23.02.1998 and the Scheme was confirmed under Section 20 of the said Act on 24.04.1998.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner was handed over the subject land in the month of May, 1998 to the extent of 2 bigha 14 biswas in respect of the aforesaid khasra number. All along, the petitioner had been in continuous possession of the subject land without any objection on any quarter whatsoever.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that after a passage of 22 years, respondent no.4 to 6 moved an application before the Deputy Commissioner, North West on 25.06.2020 seeking review/ re-partition of the said land seeking, inter alia, passage to his land bearing khasra no.32/8/2 (old), the new number being 144/41/1, which according to the petitioner is at the rear side of the petitioner's subject land.

5. It is also the case of the petitioner that in view of the said application, the respondent no.3 was directed to submit his report in respect thereto. The respondent no.3 (Halqa Patwari) submitted two reports dated 07.07.2020 and 10.07.2020 suggesting the way of giving passage from the property of the petitioner and other persons adjacent to the property of the petitioner. In the interregnum, it is the petitioner's case that on 16.05.2017, by a This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/02/2024 at 23:32:01 notification under 507(A) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act 1957, the village Kanjhawla was declared as urban area and as such post issuance of the said notification, the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954 would become inapplicable.

6. It is also the case of the petitioner that the proceedings which have been initiated are non est in law in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Mohinder Singh (Dead) Through LRs & Anr. vs. Narain Singh and Ors. reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 261 as also the fact that the Consolidation Officer himself has become functus officio and as such, has no legal authority, right or jurisdiction under law to entertain any such application filed on behalf of respondent nos. 4 to 6.

7. Mr. Rishikesh Kumar, learned ASC for respondent nos.1 to 3 submits that the short affidavit is already filed on behalf of respondent no.1 to 3 and the fact that the village Kanjhawla has been urbanized is stated in para 7 of the counter affidavit, which is as under: -

"7. That as the Village-Kanjhawla has been urbanized under section 507 of Delhi Municipal Corporation and a Gazette notification dated 16.05.2017 has already been issued by the concerned authority, but all the revenue record is laying with the Revenue Department and Gram Sabha land/ Rasta is in the jurisdiction of the Deponent. Moreover, no record has been handed over to Delhi Development Authority till now. And hence, the deponent will decide the dispute within it jurisdiction till complete handover of charge to the DDA."

8. So far as the respondent nos.4 to 6 are concerned, learned counsel appearing for the said respondents submits that written submissions on behalf of the said respondents has already been filed and are on record. In the said written submissions, the respondents have referred to the various This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/02/2024 at 23:32:02 proceedings undertaken by the Consolidation Officer as also the District Magistrate and submit that the proceedings can continue by the State Government as per provisions laid down under Sections 36 and 42 of the East Punjab Holdings Act, 1948. The respondents have also stated therein that the petitioners have suppressed material facts before this Court and pray for dismissal of the present petition.

9. This Court has considered the arguments of the counsel for the parties and as also perused the documents on record. At the outset, it is noted that it is no more res integra that once a village is notified as urbanized under Section 507(a) of the DMC Act, 1957, any proceeding under the DLR Act, 1954 would be rendered nugatory.

10. This aforesaid conclusion is also fortified by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Mohinder Singh (supra), which has categorically laid down that immediately after the notification urbanizing a particular village under Section 507(a) of DMC Act, 1957, the DLR Act, 1954 shall be completely excluded from consideration.

11. In the present case, apart from the DLR Act, this Court is also cognizant that it involves the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948. This Court is cognizant also of the fact that proceedings have been initiated by the respondents under East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 and as such the same needs consideration.

12. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, by inviting attention of this Court to para 39 of the judgment in Mohinder Singh (supra) submits that the Supreme Court was also considering the effect of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Umed Singh vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/02/2024 at 23:32:02 & Ors reported in 1997 SCC OnLine Del 842 and has disagreed with the view expressed in Umed Singh (Supra).

13. This Court needs to consider the aforesaid issue. Mr. Rishikesh, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.1 submits that the aforesaid issue is up for consideration before this Court in Writ Petition (C) No.15999/2023 listed on 15.04.2024.

14. List the present petition along with the aforesaid petition on 15.04.2024.

15. Interim orders, if any, to continue till the next date of hearing.

TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J JANUARY 29, 2024/hs This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 02/02/2024 at 23:32:03