Delhi High Court
Ajab Singh vs Land & Building Department on 16 August, 2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: August 16, 2018
+ W.P.(C) 10021/2017
AJAB SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. N.S.Dalal, Advocate
Versus
LAND & BUILDING DEPARTMENT ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. R.K.Sharma, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
1. Impugned order of 27th January, 2017 (Annexure P-1) rejects
petitioner's application for allotment of alternate plot in lieu of acquired
land, while observing that less than one bigha of petitioner's land was
acquired and the registered Relinquishment Deed has not been filed.
Impugned order also takes note of the fact that affidavit filed is of
petitioner's brother, which is notarized instead of being duly attested.
2. The challenge to the impugned order by learned counsel for
petitioner is on the ground that registered Relinquishment Deed was
submitted and as per Revenue Record, petitioner and his co-sharers had
possessed more than one bigha of land, which was acquired. It is
submitted that petitioner was not aware that a duly attested affidavit of his
brother is required to be submitted and in any case, it can be now
submitted and petitioner's case ought to be recommended by respondent
to Delhi Development Authority for allotment of alternate plot in lieu of
land acquired.
3. Counsel for respondent supports the impugned order and for this
purpose, relies upon counter affidavit filed along with this petition.
4. Upon hearing and on perusal of impugned order and the material
on record, I find that defects pointed out in the impugned order are
curable one. In the facts and circumstances of this case, it is deemed
appropriate to direct first respondent to reconsider petitioner's application
for allotment of alternate plot in lieu of acquired land, upon petitioner
submitting registered Relinquishment Deed and attested affidavit of his
brother-Mr. Vijay, s/o Kashmira Singh, to respondent within a period of
four weeks. It is also undertaken by petitioner's counsel that the relevant
revenue record to indicate that more than one bigha of land was acquired,
would be also furnished to respondent within the aforesaid time line.
Upon receiving of aforesaid documents, respondent shall consider them
and process petitioner's application within a period of twelve weeks, if
petitioner's documents are found in order. It is made clear that if for any
reason whatsoever, petitioner's application for allotment of alternate plot
is not recommended, then reasons for not doing so, be supplied to
petitioner within a period of two weeks thereafter, so that petitioner may
avail of the remedies, as available in law, if need be.
5. With aforesaid directions, this petition is disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
AUGUST 16, 2018
r
