Land & Building Department v. Ramesh @ Mahesh

$~5.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LPA 184/2017 & CM No.10585/2017 (delay in filing) LAND & BUILDING DEPARTMENT ..... Appellant Through:

Mr.B.Mahapatra, Adv.

Versus

RAMESH @ MAHESH ..... Respondent Through:

None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL

O R D E R

% 22.03.2017 1.

The Government of NCT of Delhi/Respondent in W.P.(C)No.8282/2016 is the appellant before us. 2.

The said writ petition was disposed of on 19.09.2016 and the present appeal came to be filed with a delay of 137 days. The only explanation offered is that the delay was on account of follow up of long administrative procedure in filing the appeal. Though it is pleaded that the delay was unintentional, apparently, the appellant was not diligent in pursuing the proceedings and the entire approach appears to be extremely casual. In identical circumstances we declined to condone the delay in LPAs No.138/2017 and 139/2017 titled GNCTD Vs. Sanjay & Ors. holding that the matter does not call for liberal attitude for condonation of the delay. 3.

Even on merits of the case, we are of the view that the present appeal

is squarely covered by the judgment in LPAs No.138/2017 and 139/2017. In the said appeals we confirmed the orders of the learned Single Judge in W.Ps.(C) No.8636/2016 and 8566/2016 holding that the delay of 4 days and 7 days respectively in making the applications for allotment of an alternate plot is negligible. We, thus, concluded:- "9.

It may be true that the long delay in making the application under the Scheme is a factor to draw an inference that there is no actual need of the alternative plot, however, it cannot be held that all the applications which are made beyond the period prescribed in the Public Notice shall be rejected as barred by limitation. 10.

Hence, we are in consonance with the view taken by the learned Single Judge."

4.

LPAs No.138/2017 and 139/2017 titled GNCTD Vs. Sanjay & Ors. were accordingly dismissed confirming the orders of the learned Single Judge whereby the rejection orders passed by the Government of NCT of Delhi were set aside and the applications of the writ petitioners therein were directed to be considered on merits.

5.

In the present case, we found that there was delay of one day in making the application for alternate plot. In the light of the reasons stated in the judgment rendered by us today in LPAs No.138/2017 and 139/2017 titled GNCTD Vs. Sanjay & Ors., we are of the view that the learned Single Judge was justified in accepting the explanation for the said delay of one day. Hence, the order under appeal setting aside the appellant's order of rejection dated 26.07.2016 and directing to consider the case of the writ petitioner on merits within an outer limit of four months from the date of

receipt of order warrants no interference by us. 6.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

CHIEF JUSTICE MARCH 22, 2017/pmc SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J