JUDGMENT
Swatanter Kumar, J.
1. The petitioner claims that she was the owner of 4 bighas and 18 biswas of land comprised in khasra No. 402/95 Min. situated in the revenue estate of village Masoodpur, Delhi. Vide notification No. F.-4(98)/64-L and H dated 23.1.65 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), the appropriate Government intended to acquire the entire land in furtherance to which notification/declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 26.12.1968 for large chunks of land measuring about 873 bighas including the land owned by the petitioner. The Collector vide his award No. 90/80-81 dated 22.12.80, however, only included and awarded compensation to the petitioner for the land measuring about 3 bighas out of khasra number afore- stated. The case of the petitioner is that the remaining land of 1 bigha and 18 biswas was never, thus, acquired and possession thereof continues to be with the petitioner. The acquisition proceedings initiated have already lapsed by efflux of time as the respondents have failed to make the award within the prescribed period of two years i.e. on or before 24.9.1986. The land of the petitioner, thus, stood free from acquisition proceedings and it was a free land vested in the petitioner. She being the owner, the respondents have no right to interfere in her peaceful possession. In fact on 29.3.1989, the petitioner had applied for a no objection certificate under the provisions of the Delhi Lands Restriction on Transfer Act, 1972 which was granted on that date. However, according to the petitioner, the officers and employees of the respondents came to the land in question on 16th March, 1990 and told that the land had been acquired in furtherance to the notification under Se ction 4 dated 23.1.65 and threatened to dispossess the petitioner forcibly giving rise to the filing of the present petition. The petitioner prays that the notifications issued by the respondents under Sections 4 and 6 be quashed and the respondents be restrained from disturbing the peaceful possession of the land of the petitioner in relation to 1 bigha and 18 biswas.
2. The respondents upon service filed a detailed counter affidavit. It is not very necessary for us to notice the facts stated in the counter affidavit in any great detail as the facts are hardly in dispute. In fact in paragraph No. 2 of the counter affidavit (reply on merits), the respondents stated as under:-
In reply to the same it is to be submitted that the notice under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 13-1-1965 in respect of land in question and declaration was issued on 26-12-68. The award was made for only 3 bighas and 15 biswas out of the total 4 bighas and 18 biswas of the petitioner’s land comprised in Khasra No. 402/95. The petitioner did not object at that time to the dispute in question. As only 3 bighas and 15 biswas of land was acquired vide award No. 90/80-91 dated 22-12-80 village Masood Pur, Delhi. The possession over the same has been taken over and handed over on 29-12-80. The compensation in respect of the said area measuring 3 bighas has been given to Sh. Mohal Lal S/o Sada Sukh of Village Masood Pur, Delhi the recorded owner of the land and the same was received by him on 25-7-81. However, the compensation in respect of area measuring 15 Biswas has not yet been received the said recorded owner of the land.
3. A separate counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the DDA wherein it has been stated that the total area of khasra No. 402/95 Min. situated in the revenue estate of village Masoodpur, Delhi is 4 bighas and 18 biswas out of which an area measuring about 3 bighas and 15 biswas was duly acquired by respondent No. 1 vide award No. 90/80-81 and physical possession thereof was handed over to DDA on 29.12.80 and thereafter the land was placed at the disposal of the DDA for development in accordance with master plan vide notification No. F-9(2)/78 L and B dated 3.2.81.
4. The result of the above specific reply given by the respondents which was not even disputed during the course of hearing, is that though the Section 4 notification was issued for the entire land belonging to the petitioner i.e. 4 bighas and 18 biswas but the award was made only for 3 bighas 15 biswas, thus, leaving 1 bigha 3 biswas of land in khasra No. 402/95 Min. situated in the revenue estate of village Masoodpur, Delhi out of acquisition proceedings.
5. During the course of hearing, the respondents also produced in court the original award. In the award, the acquired land of khasra No. 402/95 Min. situated in the revenue estate of Village Masoodpur, Delhi, has been shown to be 3-15 and the petitioner has not correctly shown the measurement of the land in the copy of the record annexed by her at page 49 of the paper book. Having perused the original records extract of which has also been filed by the respondents along with their counter affidavit, we have no doubt in our mind that the averments made by the petitioner in regard to measurement of the land left out of acquisition proceedings is not correct and the land which will fall beyond the acquisition proceedings would be 1 bigha and 3 biswas in khasra No.402/95 Min. situated in the revenue estate of village Masoodpur, Delhi. As far as the facts are concerned, we have already noticed that there is hardly any dispute. Notification under Section 4 was issued on 23.1.65 followed by declaration under Section 6 on 26.12.68 and the award was made on 22.12.80. Thereafter, no steps admittedly were taken by the respondents to bring the said land in the acquisition proceedings. Even the possession thereof was not taken. The above land also remained in possession of the petitioner. Thus, the land never vested in the Government free from all encumbrances or restrictions as contemplated under Section 16 of the Act. Section 11A of the Act imposes an obligation upon the Collector that he would make an award within a period of two years from the date of publication of the declaration and if no award is made within that period, the entire proceedings for acquisition of land shall lapse. Where the acquisition proceedings are pending prior to the commencement of the Act, the amending Act of 1984 had granted a further period of two years from the date of commencement of the provisions for making an award.
6. Apparently and un-disputedly the respondents have failed to adhere to the legislative mandate contained in Section 11A of the Act and as such, the acquisition proceedings qua the land measuring about 1 bigha 3 biswas forming part of khasra No. 402/95 Min. situated in the revenue estate of village Masoodpur, Delhi have left and the respondents cannot interfere in the peaceful possession of the petitioner. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. It is declared that the notifications under Sections 4 and 6 are of no consequence and effect in so far as the land of the petitioner is concerned as the acquisition proceedings have already lapsed for default of the respondents. The respondents are further restrained from interfering in the peaceful possession of the petitioner.