Delhi High Court
Ram Karan vs Land & Building Department on 16 December, 2014
Author: Suresh Kait
$~46, 47, 50 and 53
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 16th December, 2014
+ W.P.(C) 8934/2014, W.P (C) 8935/2014, W.P.(C)
8949/2014, and W.P.(C) 8953/2014
HARI RAM ..... Petitioner
in W.P.(C) 8934/2014
NARESH KUMAR & ANR ..... Petitioners
in W.P.(C) 8935/2014
KRISHAN KUMAR & ORS. ..... Petitioners
in W.P.(C) 8949/2014
RAM KARAN0 ..... Petitioner
in W.P.(C) 8953/2014
Represented by: Mr. Devesh Pratap
Singh, Adv.
versus
LAND & BUILDING DEPARTMENT ..... Respondent
Represented by: Mr. Yeeshu Jain and
Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
1. Vide these petitions, petitioners are seeking direction thereby
quashing the order dated 27.08.2014 passed by the respondent vide
which applications for allotment of alternative plot of the
petitioners have been rejected on the ground that affidavits were not
filed within two weeks as directed by this Court vide order dated
18.12.2013 in W.P.(C) 8047/2013.
2. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits
that immediately after the orders passed by this Court, winter
vacations commenced and as soon as this court opened after the
vacation, steps were taken for obtaining the certified copy of the
order in the opening week itself. Thereafter, affidavit was prepared
as per the directions of this court and filed in the Office of the
respondent on 20.01.2014, i.e., about two weeks later than the
period granted by this Court.
3. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent on
advance notice submits that the petitioners were bound to file the
affidavit in terms of order dated 18.12.2013. However, failed to do
so, therefore, the present petition deserves to be dismissed.
4. I note, vide order dated 18.12.2013; this court directed the
petitioners to file an affidavit within two weeks on the following
terms:
" (i) Land of the petitioner was acquired by Govt. of
NCT for planned` development of Delhi;
(ii) He had taken compensation in respect of the
acquired land from the Government and has not
refunded the said compensation to the Government:
(iii) He has not taken back possession of the acquired
land and has not encumbered the same or otherwise
dealt with it in any manner;
(iv) The acquisition of the aforesaid land has not been
challenged by him before any forum;
(v) He had applied to the Government of Delhi for
allotment of alternative plot."
5. In Para 10 of the said order, respondent was directed to
scrutinize the applications within a period of 12 weeks from the
date of submission of the affidavit in terms of the order. The
objection, if any, shall be communicated to the petitioners within
two weeks of completing the scrutiny and deficiency, if any, shall
be removed within four weeks thereafter.
6. The final decision on the applications seeking alternative plot
had to be taken by the respondent within a period of 12 weeks of
the deficiencies being removed in all respects and in case of
deficiency shall be communicated to the persons concerned within
two weeks thereafter. Thus, this Court framed the schedule to be
applied on the petitioners and the respondents as well. However,
due to the reason noted above, the petitioners could not file the
affidavit within two weeks, however, filed after four weeks.
7. In view of above, delay in filing the affidavit as per order
dated 18.12.2013 is condoned and the respondents are directed to
consider the applications of the petitioners as per law.
8. Accordingly, the petitions are allowed.
SURESH KAIT, J
DECEMBER 16, 2014
jg
