SH. S.L.SAINI vs SH. GYANENDER BHARTI & ORS

$~9
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CONT.CAS(C) 623/2014 & CM APPL. 38778/2018, CM APPL. 21862/2023

SH. S.L.SAINI ….. Petitioner
Through: Mr. Avadh Kaushik, Mr. Rishabh Kumar and Mr. Puneet Saini, Advs.

versus

SH. GYANENDER BHARTI & ORS ….. Respondents
Through: Ms. Rhea Verma, Adv. for DJB/R-2 with Mr. Gopal Banik, DEO/South-East
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pathak, Standing Counsel with Mr. M. S. Akhtar, Adv. for R3

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR

O R D E R (O R A L)
% 19.03.2024

1. This contempt petition alleges contumacious and wilful disobedience, by the respondents, of order dated 17 May 2012 passed by this Court in WP(C) 7167/2009. The said order reads thus:
“1. Pursuant to the order dated 25.01.2012, counsel for the respondent No.2/DJB states that he has obtained instructions from the Department to the effect that the DJB has approached the Land and Building Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, with a request to acquire the parcel of land measuring 2 Bighas 12 Biswas situated in Khasra No.590/55/1 and 592/55/2 and place the same at the disposal of the DJB, as it would not be possible for the Department to give the petitioner access to his land through the STP, Okhla. He hands over a copy of the letter dated 16.05.2012 addressed by the respondent No.2/DJB to the Deputy Secretary (LA), Land and Building Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, with an advance copy to the other side. The same is taken on record.

2. Mr. Pathak, who appears for respondent No.3/Govt. of NCT of Delhi, states that the aforesaid letter is not in proper format and in the first instance, the respondent No.2/DJB shall have to submit a request to the Govt. of NCT of Delhi for acquisition of the land in question and only thereafter, would the question of working out the compensation in respect of the land arise. This aspect can be mutually resolved by the two departments. However, the relief sought by the petitioner herein stands satisfied in view of the respondent No.2/DJB finally taking a stand that it proposes to approach the Govt. of NCT of Delhi to acquire the parcel of land on its behalf, upon payment of compensation.

3. Respondent No.2/DJB is directed to take necessary steps to forward its request to the respondent No.3/Govt. of NCT of Delhi for acquiring the subject parcel of land within a period of two weeks from today, whereafter the Govt. of NCT of Delhi shall process the application received from the respondent No.2/DJB in accordance with law as expeditiously as is possible.

4. The petition is disposed of.”

2. Clearly, the operative direction in the order dated 17 May 2012 was only for Delhi Jal Board (DJB) to forward the requisition to the Govt. of NCT of Delhi to acquire the land forming subject matter of controversy, admeasuring 2 Bighas 12 Biswas situated in Khasra No.590/55/1 and 592/55/2 and, thereafter, for the Govt. of NCT of Delhi to process the application received from the DJB in accordance with the law as expeditiously as possible.

3. There has, no doubt, been considerable delay by DJB in forwarding its request to the Govt. of NCT of Delhi. However, the request was ultimately forwarded and, as per a list of dates provided by Mr. Sanjay Pathak, learned Counsel for the respondents, the requisition from the Land & Building Department of the GNCTD was received on 31 August 2023.

4. Mr. Pathak submits that, as per the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the 2013 LA Act”) once a requisition for acquiring land for a public purpose is obtained, there has to be a joint survey of the land conducted whereafter social impact assessment of the land has also to be conducted in accordance with Section 4 of the 2013 LA Act.

5. Section 5 of the LA Act 2013 also requires a public hearing to be granted for the social impact assessment.

6. Mr. Pathak has handed over a list of dates which indicates that, after the second survey of the land using the TSM mode was conducted on 19 September 2023,
(i) bids for conducting social impact assessment were invited on 7 November 2023,
(ii) on 23 November 2023 the Indian Institute of Public Administration (IIPA) was declared as L-1,
(iii) on 30 November 2023, the DJB was informed about the declaring of the IIPA as L-1 and requested to deposit the bidding amount in the account of the Land & Building Department,
(iv) on 7 December 2023, demarcation survey was submitted by the TSM surveyor and
(v) on 15 December 2023, a meeting was held with the Land & Building Department of the DJB to clarify the aspect of ownership of the land and demarcation.

7. It cannot, therefore, be said that the Land Acquisition Collector (LAC) has been cooling its heels after receiving the requisition from the DJB for acquiring the land.

8. Procedure for acquiring the land in accordance with the 2013 LA Act is in progress.

9. The order dated 17 May 2012, of which this contempt petition alleges contempt also specially requires the GNCTD to process the application to acquire the land as received from the DJB as expeditiously as is possible in accordance with the law.

10. So long as the DJB is acting in accordance with the law, and is processing the land without any contumacious or wilful delay, no proceedings for contempt can further continue against the respondents.

11. It is settled position that a contempt petition cannot be made an avenue to ensure enforcement of an order. The Court in contempt is only required to satisfy itself that there has been no wilful or contumacious disobedience of the order.

12. Given the developments which have taken place over the last six months from the date when requisition for acquiring the land was received from the Land & Building Department on 31 August 2023, I am satisfied that the respondents cannot be said to be in contempt of the order dated 17 May 2012.

13. The LA Act 2013 envisages a detailed procedure before land is acquired even after the application for acquiring land is received.

14. Accordingly, this Court closes the present contempt petition with liberty to the petitioner to avail all other remedies as may be available to the petitioner in accordance with law.

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
MARCH 19, 2024
dsn
Click here to check corrigendum, if any

CONT.CAS(C) 623/2014 Page 4 of 5