Jawala Prasad v. The Financial Commissioner And ORS
$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 865/2016 JAWALA PRASAD ..... Petitioner Through:
Mr. R.K.Chandiwal and Mr. Ram Kumar Jayant, Advocates versus THE FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER AND ORS .....Respondents Through:
Mr. Gautam Narayan, ASC with Ms. Shivani Vij, Advocate for respondent-GNCTD Mr. V. P. Rana and Ms. Pooja Wason, Advocates for respondents No.4 to 6 & 7
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
O R D E R
% 30.08.2018 Impugned order of 17th September, 2015 remands petitioner's Application (Annexure P-4) alleging illegal encroachment on the subject land to Deputy Commissioner while relying upon Section 28 of the Delhi Land Revenue Act, 1954. The Application (Annexure P-4) was filed before the Revenue Assistant, who vide order (Annexure P-8) had on the basis of demarcation report concluded that the respondent herein had encroached upon the subject land.
The grievance of private respondents is that the demarcation was conducted ex parte and the objections filed by them have not been considered by the Revenue Assistant in the order (Annexure P-8). Impugned order remands back the matter to the Deputy Commissioner W.P.(C) 865/2016
concerned as he has the jurisdiction to deal with the boundary disputes. Section 28 of the Delhi Land Revenue Act, 1954 empowers the Deputy Commissioner to decide the boundary disputes. Upon hearing, I find that the Application (Annexure P-4) essentially raises a boundary dispute and so, the jurisdiction is of the Deputy Commissioner to deal with the Application (Annexure P-4). As such, finding no error or infirmity in the impugned order, this petition is dismissed.
At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner submits that fresh application under Section 28 of the Delhi Land Revenue Act, 1954 raising boundary dispute would be filed before the concerned Deputy Commissioner within three weeks from today. Upon receipt of said application, the concerned Deputy Commissioner shall with expedition, preferably within this calendar year, consider and dispose of the said application in accordance with law.
With aforesaid directions, this petition is disposed of. (SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE AUGUST 30, 2018 s W.P.(C) 865/2016