Sukhbir Singh Randhawa & Ors. vs Government Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors.

$~27
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
th
Date of decision: 27 October, 2026
th
Uploaded on: 30 October, 2026
# CNR No. DLHC010229542026
+ W.P.(C) 7003/2026 & CM APPL. 34393/2026
SUKHBIR SINGH RANDHAWA & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Arjun Anand, Ms. Priyam
Wadhawan, Ms. Isha Shukla & Mr.
Vibhash Kumar Singh, Advocates

versus

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Prashant Diwan, Advocate for R-
1 to R-3
Ms. Pratima N. Lakra, CGSC and Mr.
Shailendra Kumar Mishra, Advocate
for R-4
Mr. Shivam Goel, Mr. Anil Kumar
Goyal, Ms. Ramya S.Goel, Ms.Sanya
Sharma, Ms. Ishika Kanyal,
Advocates for NHAI/R-5
Ms. Jyoti Mendiratta & Ms. Ananya
Basudha for R-8 to R-10
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE DINESH BHATT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
W.P.(C) 7003/2026 & CM APPL. 34393/2026 (for interim protection)
2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioners under Articles 226
and 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia , seeking reliefs in respect of
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:30.10.2026 17:29
W.P.(C) 7003/2026 Page 1 of 10

land comprising in Khasra Nos. 262/1, 262/2, 263, 264/1/2, 267, 268, 270 and
272/1, situated in the Village Malikpur Kohi alias Rangpuri, Tehsil Mehrauli,
New Delhi. (hereinafter, ‘the subject land’) .
3. At the outset today, ld. counsel for the Petitioners submits that he has
instructions to withdraw this petition and he seeks liberty to file a fresh
petition. In the opinion of this Court, such liberty would not be liable to be
granted due to the reasons set out herein.
4. Ld. Counsel for the Land Acquisition Collector also submits that he has
filed the counter affidavit, though belatedly. The delay in filing the said
counter affidavit is condoned. The same be brought on record.
5. The brief background of the present case is that, a notification under
Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 (hereinafter, ‘NHAI Act’)
th
dated 12 January, 2018 was issued by the Ministry of Road Transport and
Highways, wherein the subject land was sought to be acquired. The
acquisition was for the purposes of development of the Dwarka Expressway.
6. Subsequent to the said notification, a notification under Section 3D of
th
the NHAI Act was also issued on 5 June, 2018.
7. The Petitioners claim to have purchased the subject land way back in
1993, from the earlier recorded owners, who are impleaded as Respondent
Nos. 6 to 16.
8. Thereafter, certain disputes arose between the recorded owners and the
Petitioners, resulting in a suit for specific performance being filed by the
Petitioners being CS. No. 7179/2016 . The said suit was decreed vide
th
judgment dated 6 June, 2019 passed by the ld. Additional District Judge
(South District), Saket Court Complex.
9. In terms of the said judgement, the civil court has only granted a refund
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:30.10.2026 17:29
W.P.(C) 7003/2026 Page 2 of 10

of a sum of Rs.48,25,000/-. The relevant portion of the said judgement is set
out below:
“ Relief
7. In final analysis, in view of the discussion above, the
plaintiff is not entitled for the specific performance of
the contract with regard to the suit property. The
plaintiff is only entitled to refund of ₹48,25,000/- from
the defendants and the defendants are entitled for the
peaceful, vacant possession of the suit property i.e.
land bearing khasra No. 262/1(2-16), 262/2(2-0),
263(4-16), 264/1/2(0-12), 267(4-16), 268(4-16), 270(3-
18), 272/1(2-7), situated in village Malikpur Kohi alias
Rangpuri, Tehsil Mehrauli, New Delhi from the
plaintiff.

The suit is accordingly partly decreed in
aforesaid terms. Decree-sheet be prepared after
payment of deficit courtfee. Parties are left to bear their
own costs.”

10. Thereafter, the judgement dated 6th June, 2019 has been challenged
before a ld. Single Judge of this Court in RFA No. 679/2019 , wherein the
judgment dated 6th June, 2019 has been stayed.
11. Insofar as the acquisition of the subject land is concerned, subsequent
to the issuance of notifications under Section 3A and Section 3D of the NHAI
th
Act, the Award No.2/2018/NHAI has also been passed on 18 December,
2018.
12. The present petition has been filed at this stage on the ground that the
boundary wall situated on the Petitioners’ land is being demolished and,
therefore, an interim order is sought.
13. On 20th May, 2026, the following submissions were made by the ld.
Counsels for the parties:
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:30.10.2026 17:29
W.P.(C) 7003/2026 Page 3 of 10

“[...]
12. It is further contended that the acquisition
proceedings of the subject land are liable to be
quashed, inasmuch as the period of five years for
utilisation of the land prescribed under Section 101
of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency
in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement
Act (hereinafter, ‘Act, 2013’) has elapsed.

13. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner also submits
that the ‘Preliminary notice for removal of
unauthorised occupation’ issued by the National
Highways Authority of India (hereinafter, ‘NHAI’)
dated 14th May, 2026 was also not issued in respect
of the correct khasra no. and, therefore, the taking
over of possession of the subject land is illegal and
unlawful.

14. On the other hand, Mr. Goel, ld. Counsel for
the NHAI has made the following submissions:
(i) The Petitioners were proceeding on the basis
that the acquisition of the subject land was under
the old Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter,
‘Act, 1894’) and not the Act, 2013, which is
completely incorrect.
(ii) The present acquisition is governed by the
provisions of the NHAI Act and, therefore, upon
the issuance of notification under Section 3D of
the NHAI Act, the subject land vests absolutely
with the Central Government.
(iii) The compensation amount of
Rs.4,42,41,462/- has already been deposited in
terms of the Section 3H(4) of the NHAI Act,
before the reference court, ld. ADJ, Patiala
House Courts, New Delhi. Thus, it is stated that
the compensation having been deposited, and the
subject land already being vested with the
Central Government, no relief can be granted to
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:30.10.2026 17:29
W.P.(C) 7003/2026 Page 4 of 10

the Petitioners.”


14. On the said date, after considering the submissions made by the parties,
the Court had observed as under:
“[...] 15. Heard the ld. counsels for the parties. The
first and foremost fact that deserves to be noted is that
the notifications issued for acquisition are under Section
3A and Section 3D of the NHAI Act.

16. Section 3D of the NHAI Act is clear to the following
effect:
“ 3D. Declaration of acquisition.—( 1) Where no
objection under sub-section (1) of section 3C has been
made to the competent authority within the period
specified therein or where the competent authority has
disallowed the objection under sub-section (2) of that
section, the competent authority shall, as soon as may
be, submit a report accordingly to the Central
Government and on receipt of such report, the Central
Government shall declare, by notification in the Official
Gazette, that the land should be acquired for the purpose
or purposes mentioned in sub-section (1) of section 3A.

(2) On the publication of the declaration under sub-
section (1), the land shall vest absolutely in the Central
Government free from all encumbrances. ”

17. As can be seen from Section 3D(2), upon the
issuance of the notification under Section 3D, the land
vests absolutely with the Central Government.

18. The same has also been reiterated by the Supreme
Court in its decision dated 20th July, 2021 titled NHAI
v. M. Hakeem, (2021) 9 SCC 1 wherein the Supreme
Court has observed as under:
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:30.10.2026 17:29
W.P.(C) 7003/2026 Page 5 of 10

“[...]

52. As has been stated by us, the object of the
NH Laws (Amendment) Act, 1997 is to expedite
the process of acquisition. This has been
achieved by cutting down the period for hearing
of objections from 30 days under Section 5-A of
the Land Acquisition Act to 21 days under
Section 3-C of the National Highways Act.
Further, unlike the Land Acquisition Act, the
moment a notification under Section 3-D(2) of
the National Highways Act (equivalent to
Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act) is made,
the land vests absolutely in the Central
Government free from all encumbrances.
Thereafter, where land has vested in the Central
Government and the amount determined by the
competent authority under Section 3-G as
compensation has been deposited by the Central
Government in accordance with Section 3-H(1),
the competent authority may then direct that
possession be taken within 60 days of service of
notice by it.

19. Moreover, the Petitioners have also been
completely recalcitrant in approaching the Court.
The Petitioners have failed to file any objections
pursuant to the issuance of the notification under
Section 3A of the NHAI Act, which ought to have
been filed within the period specified in the
notification under Section 3A of the NHAI Act. No
objections have been filed by the Petitioners till
date.

20. The notification under Section 3D of the
NHAI Act has been issued and the Award has also
been passed. The Petitioners are also aware that
the compensation stands deposited. The
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:30.10.2026 17:29
W.P.(C) 7003/2026 Page 6 of 10

compensation cannot be released to the Petitioners
till the civil disputes between them and the recorded
owners of the subject land are resolved. The
reference court is taking a view in this regard and
the decree for specific performance is also a subject
matter of an appeal before this Court….”

15. In terms thereof, the Court observed that pursuant to the notification
under Section 3D of the NHAI Act, the subject land vests absolutely with the
Central Government. It was also noted that the Petitioners did not file any
objections under Section 3C of the NHAI Act within the period prescribed
and, indeed, have not filed any objections till date. Further, it was noted that
the Award has also been passed, and the compensation stands deposited. It
was also noted that the release of compensation to the Petitioners would be
contingent upon the resolution of the civil disputes between the Petitioners
and the contesting respondents, which are pending before the reference court
and in appeal before this Court.
16. In these circumstances, the Court observed that the prayer for interim
relief was not made out. Thereafter, the Court had also directed as under:
“24. In the meantime, the Respondents shall place on
record the details of the notification under Section 3D
of the NHAI Act, the panchnama showing the
possession of the subject land being taken, as also the
details of the compensation that has been deposited. ”

17. Today, ld. Counsel for the National Highways Authority of India
(hereinafter, ‘NHAI’) submits that the possession of the subject land was
st nd
taken way back on 1 October, 2020 and 22 February, 2021, as per kabza
st st
karyavahi dated 1 October, 2020 and 1 March, 2021. Thus, the stand of the
Petitioners that they were in possession of the property when they filed the
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:30.10.2026 17:29
W.P.(C) 7003/2026 Page 7 of 10

present petition itself, was completely malafide, as per NHAI.
18. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the physical possession of
th
the subject land was taken only on 20 May, 2026.
19. Ld. Counsel for Respondent Nos. 8 to 10 also challenges the locus
standi of the Petitioners, who have already lost in the specific performance
suit being CS. No. 7179/2016 .
20. Further, it is pointed out by ld. Counsel for NHAI that after the filing
of the present petition, the Petitioner No.1 had filed another writ petition
which was listed before the learned Single Judge being W.P. (C) No.
7052/2026 titled ‘Sukhbir Singh Randhawa v. National Highway Authority
of India and ors.’ wherein, in respect of the same award, though a separate
khasra , bearing No. 259/2, situated in the Village Malikpur Kohi alias
Rangpuri, Tehsil Mehrauli, New Delhi, certain reliefs were sought. The said
writ petition was dismissed by the Court on the ground that there was non-
disclosure of proceedings of the present matter.
21. A perusal of order dated 21st September, 2026, in W.P. (C) No.
7052/2026 shows that the ld. Single Judge had taken a strict view of the non-
disclosure by the Petitioners and had dismissed the writ petition. The relevant
portion of the order dated 21st September, 2026 is set out below:
“xxxx xxxx xxxx

11. The petitioner had himself produced the Notification
dated 12.01.2018 and Award dated 18.12.2018 in the
said petition. Significantly, the Schedule appended to
the very same Notification dated 12.01.2018 also
includes Khasra No. 259/2, which is the subject matter
of the present petition. Thus, although the relief sought
in the earlier writ petition pertained to other khasra
numbers, it is evident that the petitioner was aware of
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:30.10.2026 17:29
W.P.(C) 7003/2026 Page 8 of 10

the acquisition proceedings with respect to the subject
property, even though he has claimed to the contrary
in his petition.

12. The petitioner ought to have disclosed their
challenge to the acquisition proceedings before this
Court. The non-disclosure of the aforesaid facts
regarding earlier proceedings before this Court in the
petition filed by the petitioner herein, is a serious
matter. The petitioner has concealed material facts
pertaining to the present case and has not approached
this Court with clean hands.

13. This Court exercises discretionary and
extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution, it is therefore of utmost necessity that
when a party approaches the Court by way of a writ
petition, they must place all the material facts before this
Court. If there is a suppression of material facts on the
part of the petitioner or twisted facts have been placed
before this Court, the said petition may not be
entertained and dismissed without entering into the
merits of the matter.

14. Since petitioner has concealed material facts which
have direct bearing on the result of this writ petition, I
am of the view that petitioner is not entitled for any relief
from this Court in exercise of its extraordinary
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India.

15. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed.

22. After hearing the ld. Counsels for the parties, it becomes clear that the
Petitioners do not deserve to be granted any liberty to file a fresh writ petition,
in view of the facts recorded above.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:30.10.2026 17:29
W.P.(C) 7003/2026 Page 9 of 10

23. Under the above recorded factual circumstances, the petition is
dismissed as withdrawn. However, no liberty is granted, as prayed for.
Remedies, if any, for claiming compensation in respect of the subject land are
however left open, to be availed in accordance with law.


PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE

DINESH BHATT
JUDGE
OCTOBER 27, 2026
‘ rs’/sm

Signature Not Verified
Signed By:MONIKA
RANA
Signing
Date:30.10.2026 17:29
W.P.(C) 7003/2026 Page 10 of 10