Anil Kumar Gami Sole Proprietor M/S Chem Ace Marketing v. Delhi Development Authority Through Its Vice Chairman & ORS.

$~95 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 2505/2025, CM APPL. 11861/2025 & CM APPL. 11862/2025 ANIL KUMAR GAMI SOLE PROPRIETOR M/S CHEM ACE MARKETING .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Arjav Jain with Ms. Archana Jain, Advocates along with the petitioner.

versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY THROUGH ITS VICE CHAIRMAN & ORS.

.....Respondent Through:

Ms. Prabhsahay Kaur with Mr. Aditya with Ms. Kavya Shukla, Advocates.

Mr. Shiven Verma, Advocate for R-2 and 3.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN

O R D E R

% 27.02.2025 1.

The grievance raised by the petitioner is very short one. 2.

Petitioner was allotted a warehousing plot i.e. Plot No. 278, Block-C, measuring 50.00 square meters situated in IFC Holambi Kalan, Narela, Delhi. 3.

Allotment letter was received by the petitioner on 18.10.2019. 4.

The attention of this Court has been drawn towards the show-cause notice issued by DDA on 18.04.2022 whereby they had asked the petitioner to explain reasons as to why allotment be not cancelled for non-submission of documents.

5.

According to petitioner, he had sent appropriate reply to the abovesaid letter on 26.04.2022 and along with the abovesaid letter, he had also sent the complete set of documents but despite above, nothing further has been done. 6.

Learned counsel for DDA appears on advance notice and submits that she does not have requisite instructions whether the above said response dated W.P.(C) 2505/2025 1 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 19:51:22

26.04.2022, was ever received by DDA or not.

7.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that, even otherwise, all such documents, which the respondent Authority wanted, are already part of the present writ petition as well .

8.

Learned counsel for respondent Authority submits that, without prejudice to their rights and contentions, they would treat the present writ petition as a representation and would take appropriate action in accordance with law, in a time-bound manner.

9.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has no objection to the above said proposal.

10.

In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed by directing to respondent Authority consider the present writ petition as a representation and to decide the same in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks. 11.

Needless to say, in case, respondent requires some additional documents or information from the petitioner, the same shall be communicated to him well in advance so that there is no further delay in the matter.

12.

Petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. 13.

All rights and contentions of the parties are reserved. 14.

It is, however, clarified that this court has not given any observation about the merits of the case.

15.

Needless to say, in case, petitioner is aggrieved by the outcome of such representation, he would be at liberty to take appropriate remedial steps, as permissible under law.

MANOJ JAIN, J FEBRUARY 27, 2025/sw/ss W.P.(C) 2505/2025 2 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/07/2025 at 19:51:22