Bhule Singh v. Govt Of NCT Of Delhi

$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 6991/2018, CM No. 26447/2018 BHULE SINGH ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Naresh K. Daksh, Adv.

versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Yeeshu Jain, Standing Counsel for L&B

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

O R D E R

% 01.08.2018 No counter affidavit has been filed.

1.

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the communication dated November 10, 2017 whereby his request for allotment of alternative plot has been rejected on the ground that the requisite documents i.e. Occupancy / Ownership Status of Property bearing No.241, Jagatpur Delhi / Lal Dora signed by Tehsildar Concerned, Affidavit in prescribed format, Payment certificate in original duly attested by competent authority have not been furnished by him.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to page 8 of the writ petition to contend that the petitioner has submitted all the documents and the same are available on the record of the respondent. He states, without joining any issue with the respondent, the petitioner is ready and willing, once again to submit the said documents as sought for, vide impugned communication to enable the respondent consider the petitioner's application for allotment of alternative plot, subject to any condition this Court may impose.

3.

Mr. Yeeshu Jain, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent justifies the impugned communication dated November 10, 2017. He acknowledges the fact that this Court in a similar matter, in the case of W.P. (C) 5186/2018, Bhanwar Singh vs. Land & Building Department, vide order dated May 22, 2018 has directed the petitioner / applicant to submit requisite documents, and for reconsideration of the application for allotment of alternative plot by the respondent, subject to payment of cost of Rs.15,000/-.

4.

Noting the submissions made, and in view of order of this Court in Bhanwar Singh (supra) the communication dated November 10, 2017 is set aside. The petitioner shall furnish the documents named in the

communication dated November 10, 2017 within six weeks from today. If any deficiencies are found in the documents submitted by the petitioner, the same shall be communicated to the petitioner within two weeks of consideration by the Recommendation Committee. The deficiencies if any shall be cured by the petitioner within two weeks thereafter. The respondent through its Committee shall consider the documents and decide the application on merit and communicate the decision to the petitioner. The reconsideration is subject to payment of cost of Rs.15,000/- to be deposited with the Delhi High Court Advocates Welfare Trust within four weeks from today. The petitioner shall submit the proof of deposit of cost to the respondent along with the documents.

5.

The petition is disposed of as such. If the petitioner is still aggrieved by the order to be passed by the respondent, liberty shall be with the petitioner to seek such remedy as available in accordance with law. CM No. 26447/2018 Dismissed as infructuous.

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J AUGUST 01, 2018/aky