Tarun Mittal v. Manish Kumar Gupta And ANR

$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CONT.CAS(C) 894/2022 CM APPL. 45665/2024 (CM For Restoration) TARUN MITTAL .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Samit Khosla, Advocate versus MANISH KUMAR GUPTA AND ANR .....Respondents Through:

Ms. Manika Tripathy and Mr.

Ashutosh Kaushik, Advocates.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

O R D E R

% 20.03.2025 1.

It is informed by Ms. Manika Tripathy, counsel appearing for Delhi Development Authority ('DDA') that the Review Petition No.32/2023 in W.P. (C) 6336/2021 has since been dismissed by order dated 26th July 2024 by a Coordinate Bench of this Court.

2.

The review was sought of order of 14th February 2022, which had noticed the DDA's letter of 3rd February 2020, proposing three alternatives, which could be allotted to the petitioner in lieu of the portion of the land which was to be allocated to the petitioner.

3.

By order dated 14th February 2022, eight weeks were given for the DDA to pass consequential orders in terms of the letter dated 3rd February 2020. Having not complied with that order, this contempt petition was filed. 4.

The matter has been on the Board since 2022. The review petition 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 25/03/2025 at 13:36:28

also stands dismissed.

5.

It is now stated by the counsel for the DDA that they intend to file an appeal against the orders dated 14th February 2022 and 26th July 2024. 6.

It is stated by Ms. Manika Tripathy, counsel for DDA that when the matter was pending consideration by the DDA, it was discovered that the records of the Sub-division Magistrate ('SDM') had been interpolated and the name of the owner of the concerned land had been suddenly changed on one particular day and, therefore, they have not given a favorable decision post letter dated 3rd February 2020.

7.

However, in the opinion of this Court, if this was so, what, at least, the DDA could have done, was to communicate the same through a formal communication through an authorized officer to the petitioner, in order that they were put to notice of the same.

8.

Clearly, this has not been done. Merely on this basis, the review petition had been filed, which was disposed of. 9.

The matter, therefore, rests on the point that a decision ought to be taken on the letter dated 3rd February 2020.

10.

It is up to the DDA to take whatever decision they want. Therefore, it is directed that a considered decision shall be taken pursuant to the letter dated 3rd February 2020, which shall be placed on record of this Court, as well as a copy of the same shall be provided to the petitioner. 11.

List on 16th July 2025.

12.

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court. ANISH DAYAL, J MARCH 20, 2025/sm/bp 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 25/03/2025 at 13:36:28