← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/16412/2024

Deepak Chhaudha & ANR. v. Union Of India & ORS.

2024-11-27Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Manoj Jain2 pages

$~116 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 27th November, 2024 + W.P.(C) 16412/2024 & CM APPL. 69131-69132/2024 DEEPAK CHHAUDHA & ANR.

.....Petitioners Through:

Mr. Alok Kumar Pandey with Mr.Mohit Kumar and Mr. Kunal Prakash, Advocates.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Farman Ali, SPC for UOI with Ms. Usha Jamnal, Advocates for respondent No.1.

Mr. Shashi Pratap Singh with Ms.Muskaan Garg, Advocates for DDA.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral) 1.

Present petition has been filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking directions to the respondents for mutation of the suit property in their favour and conversion of the property from leasehold to freehold, subject to the payment as per the Gadgil Assurance Scheme or, in alternate, to provide an alternative accommodation in terms of the above said Scheme. 2.

Learned counsel for respondent DDA, who appears on advance notice, on instructions, submits that they would have no reservation if the present writ petition is directed to be treated as a representation. It is assured that before deciding the representation, the petitioners By:SONIA THAPLIYAL 15:56:22 W.P.(C) 16412/2024

would be given an opportunity of personal hearing and the concerned competent Authority would dispose of the same, in accordance with law, preferably, within a period of twelve weeks from today. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions, states that he has no objection to the above said proposal. 4.

In view of the above, the petition is disposed of with direction that the respondent Authority i.e. DDA shall consider the present writ petition as a representation and would dispose of the same by way of a speaking and reasoned order within a period of twelve weeks from today. Needless to say, within the above said period of twelve weeks, the petitioners would also be given an opportunity of personal hearing.

5.

Needless to emphasize, if the petitioners are aggrieved by the outcome of the above said representation, they would be at liberty to take recourse to appropriate action as permissible under the law. 6.

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

(MANOJ JAIN) JUDGE NOVEMBER 27, 2024 st By:SONIA THAPLIYAL 15:56:22 W.P.(C) 16412/2024