Netra Agency Pvt Ltd v. Lt Governor of Delhi and Ors

ORDER 0/o

12.10.2012 CM No.17194/2012 in WP(C) No.6479/2012 CM No.17196/2012 in WP(C) No.6480/2012 CM No.17198/2012 in WP(C) No.648112012 CM No.17200/2012 in WP(C) No.6482/2012 Allowed subject to just exceptions. WP(C) No.6479/2012 and CM No.17193/2012 WP(C) No.6480/2012 and CM No.17195/2012 WP(C) No.648112012 and CM No.17197 /2012 WP(C) No.6482/2012 and CM No.17199/2012 The petitioners. have been compelled to approach this court as they are identically situated to the petitioners in WP(C) No.5401/2010. The common grievance is that the alignment of the road has been changed for collateral purpose and the land of the petitioners is now sought to be acquired. In those WP(C) Nos. 6479-648212012 proceedings the Division Bench had heard learned counsel for the parties at length whereafter the petitioners agreed that they would be satisfied if their representation under Section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is examined and till then interim protection continues. We are informed that despite that writ petition having been disposed . of on 13 .1 0.20 11 and the representation under Section 48 of the said Act having been made in Nove_mber, 2011, no final decision has been taken. Learned counsel states that the petitioners in the present cases in fact approached the competent authority first under Section 48 of the said Act rather than approach this court as they were of the view that they can be dealt with identically as the petitioners. in that petition but since steps are being taken to take over the possession of their land, the petitioners have been compelled to approach this Court. We are of the view that the applications of the petitioners in the present cases under Section 48 of the said Act can be taken up by the competent authority along with the representation made by the petitioners in WP(C) No.5401/2010 and till a decision is rendered, a similar interim protection must enure for the benefit of the petitioners. Thus status quo would be maintained by the parties as to nature, title and possession of the land in question till a decision is taken on the applications of the petitioners and communicated to the petitioners and for a period of 15 days thereafter so that in case of an adverse decision the petitioners are not left remedy less. WP(C) Nos. 6479-6482/2012 Page 3 of4 --·· ---------------------------------------- The writ petitions and the applications accordingly stand disposed of. Dasti to learned counsel for the parties under the signatures of the Court Master. ..... - . SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J J1rr OCTOBER 12, 2012/dm VIPIN SANGHI, J WP(C) Nos. 6479-64821201 f Page 4 of4 ,)

* + .- + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 6479/2012 RANDHIR SINGH AND ORS ..... Petitioner Through: Dr.Surat Singh with Mr.Setu Niket, Advs. versus LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Sanjeev Sahay, Advocate for R-1 & R-3. Mr.Ajay Verma, Advocate for R-2/DDA. AND W.P.(C) 6480/2012 ARUNKAPOOR ..... Petitioner versus Through: Dr.Surat Singh with Mr.Setu Niket, Advs. LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI AND ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Sanjeev Sahay, Advocate for R-1 & R-3. Mr.Ajay Verma, Advocate for R-2/DDA. AND + W.P.(C) 6481/2012 NEIRA AGENCY PVT. LTD. . .... Petitioner Through: Dr.Surat Singh with Mr.Setu Niket, Advs. versus LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI AND ORS ..... Respondent WP(C) Nos. 6479-6482/2012 Through: Mr.Sanjeev Sahay, Advocate for R-1 & R-3. Mr.Ajay Verma, Advocate for R-2/DDA. Page 1 of4 AND + W.P.(C) 6482/2012 SURESH CHAND GARG versus Through: Dr.Surat Singh with Mr.Setu Niket, Advs. LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI AND ORS ..... Petitioner ..... Respondents Through: Mr.Sanjeev Sahay, Advocate for R-1 & R-3. CORAM: Mr.Ajay Ve1ma, Advocate for R-2/DDA. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI