Kishan Chand Saini vs Delhi Development Authority
2015 Latest Caselaw 7015 Del

                                                                               #29
$~
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+      W.P.(C) 8129/2013

       KISHAN CHAND SAINI               ..... Petitioner
                    Through             Mr. Sitab Ali Chaudhary, Advocate

                          versus

       DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ..... Respondent
                    Through Mr. Kush Sharma, Advocate for
                            DDA.

%                                  Date of Decision : 16th September, 2015

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

                             JUDGMENT

MANMOHAN, J: (Oral)

1. Present writ petition has been filed challenging respondent-DDA's action of refusing to allot a plot vide letter dated 23rd October, 2012 under the Rohini Residential Scheme, 1981 to the petitioner on the ground that a flat bearing no. 131-B, First Floor, Pocket-6, Phase II, Kondli Gharoli, Delhi had already been allotted to him on 7th November, 1996. Petitioner also prays for allotment through mini draw within a time bound manner, an MIG plot against his application no. 72748 (FDR No. 20921) under Rohini Residential Scheme, 1981 as per his entitlement and policy.

2. It is the petitioner's case that the earlier flat allotted in Kondli Gharoli in a mini draw held on 7thNovember, 1996 was less that 67 sq. yards and he had sold it off to Smt. Kalyani Mitra Rani in 2000.

3. Mr. Sitab Ali Chaudhary, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the Supreme Court has categorically held in Delhi Development Authority vs. Jitender Pal Bhardwaj, (2010) 1 SCC 146 that a person who owns a house or a plot less than 67 sq. mtrs. would be eligible for a second allotment.

4. Mr. Kush Sharma, learned counsel for respondent-DDA states that petitioner has not approached this Court with clean hands as he has suppressed the fact of prior allotment.

5. Having heard learned counsel for parties, this Court is of the opinion that in view of the judgment in Delhi Development Authority vs. Jitender Pal Bhardwaj (supra) as well as this Court's Division Bench judgment in Delhi Development Authority Vs. B.B. Jain, LPA No. 670/2012, decided on 5th March, 2013, petitioner is entitled to second allotment inasmuch as the initial flat was less than 67 sq. mtrs. and, therefore, the prohibition contained in Nazul Land Rules is not attracted. It is pertinent to mention that in Delhi Development Authority Vs. B.B. Jaini (supra), the Division Bench held that any allotment by DDA after coming into force of Nazul Land Rules would be governed by the Nazul Land Rules and not by the provisions of a Residential Scheme to the extent that the provisions of the Scheme were contrary to the Nazul Land Rules. The Division Bench also held that Nazul Land Rules are statutory in character.

6. Consequently, as the restriction of second allotment as envisaged under the Rohini Residential Scheme is inapplicable to the facts of the

present case, this Court is of the opinion that petitioner has not suppressed any relevant information. Accordingly, respondent-DDA's letter dated 23rd October, 2012 is quashed and respondent-DDA is directed to allot through mini draw within twelve weeks an MIG plot against his application no. 72748 (FDR No. 20921) under Rohini Residential Scheme, 1981 as per his entitlement and policy.

7. With the aforesaid observations and direction, present writ petition stands disposed of. However, it is clarified that allowing of the present writ petition will not come in the way of respondent-DDA taking such action as is open to it in law on account of petitioner having allegedly filed false letters dated 9th and 10th July, 2012.

MANMOHAN, J SEPTEMBER 16, 2015 rn