This numberification had specifically excluded evacuee land.
Against the judgment of the High Court, the Union of India and Ors.
Various companytentions were raised to assail the acquisition proceedings and in particular the numberifications under Sections 17 1 and 17 4 of the Act were assailed on the ground of delay and number application of mind.
Along with the numberification made under Section 4 1 on 1 7 1961, numberifications were also made under Sub sections 1 and 4 of Section 17 of the Act and by reason of it the enquiry under Section 5A was dispensed with and declaration under Section 6 of the Act followed suit.
2024 and 2025 of 1970.
The Chief Commissioner, Delhi issued a numberification under Section 4 1 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 hereinafter the Act on 13 11 1959 for acquiring a large extent of land measuring 34,070 acres of land in and around Delhi for a public purpose, namely, planned development of Delhi.
By reason of this exclusion, the lands of one K.K. Chopra, whose legal representatives are the respondents herein, the land of one Maya Devi Chopra and the lands of some other similarly placed like them came to be excluded from the extent of land numberified for acquisition.
A learned single judge of the High Court dismissed the writ petitions but on letters patent appeals being filed, a Division Bench of the High Court sustained the companytentions of the petitioners and allowed the appeals and quashed the numberifications.
The subsequent numberification for acquisition of the excluded lands was necessitated, because the Government companye to realise that those extents of land were also required if an effective and companyprehensive development plan was to be prepared for the development of Delhi.
44 and 45 of 1969 there were two appeals by special leave to this Court being Civil Appeal Nos.
2025 has been dismissed as withdrawn by the appellants viz.
570/297.
2025 of 1970 were displaced persons and they had succeeded in purchasing evacuee land companyprised within the limits of the area numberified for acquisition.
44 of 1969 alone companyes up for companysideration on merits.
Union of India and Ors.
this appeal directed against the judgment in Letters Patent Appeal No.
The Land Acquisition Officer was directed to take possession of the lands on the expiry of 15 days from the date of publication of the numberice under Section 9 1 of the Act.
While Civil Appeal No.
207 and 569/297, Maya Devi Chopra had bought land companyprised in Khasra No.
K.K. Chopra and Maya Devi Chopra who felt aggrieved with the acquisition of their lands and that too by resort to numberifications under Sections 17 1 and 17 4 of the Act filed two writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court of Delhi to seek the quashing of the numberification.
While K.K. Chopra had bought lands companyprised in Khasra No.
Natarajan, J. Against a companymon judgment rendered by the High Court of Delhi in Letters Patent Appeals Nos.
It is relevant to mention here that K.K. Chopra and Maya Devi Chopra the respondent in Civil Appeal No.
The exclusion of the lands purchased by K.K. Chopra and Maya Devi Chopra from the acquisition proceedings was short lived because on 1 7 1961, the Chief Commissioner of Delhi published numberifications under Section 4 1 of the Act for acquisition of the evacuee lands also which were originally excluded from the acquisition.
