Delhi High Court
Poonam Gupta vs Gnct Of Delhi on 11 August, 2014
Author: Suresh Kait
$~13
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 11th August, 2014
+ W.P.(C) No.1368 /2014
POONAM GUPTA ..... Petitioner
Represented by: Mr. Tanuj Khurana and Mr. Ankur,
Advocates.
Versus
GNCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Represented by: Mr. Puneet Aggarwal, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
1. Counter-affidavit filed by the respondent is on record.
2. Mr. Tanuj Khurana, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that petitioner does not wish to file rejoinder to the
same.
3. Pleadings are complete.
4. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the instant
petition is taken up for disposal.
5. Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the
impugned order dated11.09.2013, whereby the Dy. Secretary, Land &
Building Department, (Task Force/Alt. Branch), Govt. of NCT of Delhi,
rejected the petitioners case for allotment of alternative plot in lieu of
acquired land. The same reads as under:-
"Sub. Regarding allotment of alternative plot in
lieu of acquired land.
Sir/Madam,
With reference to the above-mentioned subject, it
is to inform you that your case for allotment of
alternative plot in lieu of acquired land has been placed
before the meeting of Recommendation Committee held
on 12/08/2013 and the Committee observed that the
applicant Shri Bishan Swaroop Gupta applied for
allotment of alternative plot in lieu of his acquired land
vide his application dated 28.05.92 in the area of village
Sahabad Daulatpur. The applicant received
compensation on 07.02.92 but failed to apply within the
prescribed limit of three months. Since the applicant
failed to apply within the prescribed limit of three
months, the case is, therefore REJECTED."
6. I note, the petitioner made an application for allotment of
alternative plot on 28.05.1992 and cut off date for making the said
application was 31.01.1994. Though, in the check list of the application
annexed as Annexure O at page No.137, against the column No. (3)
captioned as 'Whether application in time:", it is written 'Yes'.
7. In the impugned order dated 11.09.2013, it is admitted that the
petitioner made an application on 28.05.1992 and received compensation
on 07.02.1992. It is shocking that vide order dated 11.09.2013,
petitioner's application dated 28.05.1992 has been rejected on the
premise that the same was out of the time limit of three months, whereas
the aforesaid rejection order dated 11.09.2013 was passed after more than
21 years from the date of the application made by the petitioner.
8. In view of the above noted facts, I hereby set aside the impugned
order dated 11.09.2013. The respondent is directed to consider the
application of the petitioner on merits and if the petitioner is found
eligible for allotment of the alternative plot in lieu of acquired land, then
the same shall be allotted in her favour.
9. Since the case of the petitioner regarding alternative plot is 22
years old, therefore, I direct the concerned Authority to decide the
application of the petitioner strictly within a period of two months from
today.
10. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed on the above terms.
11. A copy of this order be given dasti to the learned counsel for the
parties.
SURESH KAIT
(JUDGE)
AUGUST 11, 2014
sb
