Shri Om Prakash v. Land And Building Department

$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1015/2018 SHRI OM PRAKASH ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. N S Dalal, Advocate with Mr.

Amit Dhankhar, Advocates versus LAND AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel With Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Advocate

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

O R D E R

% 01.10.2018 Impugned order of 13th November, 2017 rejects petitioner's application for allotment of alternate plot in lieu of acquired land on the ground that affidavit in the prescribed format and complete revenue record duly attested by the competent authority has not been furnished despite sufficient opportunity is given. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondent, it is spelt out that there was cutting in the copy of the revenue record submitted and the said revenue record is not attested and the affidavit does not contain the crucial paragraph on concealment as fact.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that whatever documents were received from the revenue authorities were submitted vide application (Annexure P-3) which were duly received by the WP(C) No. 1015/2018

respondent.

Upon hearing and on perusal of impugned order, which is not on record, I find that no documents have been filed and even petitioner has not been filed the documents/copy of the revenue record which was so submitted by the respondent. The deficiency in the application was made known to the similarly situated persons by way of public notice in the leading newspapers.

Be that as it may, in the facts and circumstances of this case, it is deemed appropriate to give one opportunity to petitioners to make up the deficiencies while putting petitioner to terms, subject to petitioner depositing cost of `15,000/- with the Prime Ministers' Relief Fund within a period of four weeks and upon producing the proof of deposit along with the documents sought, petitioner's application for allotment of alternate plot in lieu of the acquired land be reconsidered within a period of twelve weeks and thereafter, the fate of the petitioner be made known to the petitioner within two weeks, thereafter, so that the petitioner may avail of the remedy, if need be.

With the aforesaid directions, this petition is disposed of. SUNIL GAUR, J.

OCTOBER 01, 2018 P WP(C) No. 1015/2018