Shri Pramod Kumar v. Land & Building Department

$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 11418/2017 SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Devesh Pratap Singh, Adv.

versus LAND & BUILDING DEPARTMENT ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Yeeshu Jain, SC with Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

O R D E R

% 25.07.2018 1.

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the letter dated November 13, 2017. Vide the said letter the respondent has rejected the request of the petitioner for allotment of alternative plot on the ground that the petitioner had not submitted requisite documents like complete revenue record duly attested by the competent authority to establish the ownership over the acquired land and Affidavit in prescribed format.

2.

Mr. Devesh Pratap Singh states, even though the said documents have been submitted by the petitioner, without joining any issue with the respondent, the petitioner is ready, once again to submit the said documents

to enable the respondent to consider the petitioner's application for allotment of alternate plot, subject to any condition this Court may impose. He has referred to an order dated May 22, 2018 passed by this Court in W.P. (C) 5186/2018, Bhanwar Singh vs. Land & Building Department in support of his contention.

3.

Mr. Yeeshu Jain and Ms. Jyoti Tyagi, learned counsels appearing for the respondent justify the impugned letter dated November 13, 2017. They acknowledge the fact that this Court in a similar matter has directed the petitioner/applicant(s) 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 13, 2017 is set aside. The petitioner shall furnish the documents named in the communication dated November 13, 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, the liberty shall be with the petitioner to seek such remedy as available in accordance with the law. Dasti.

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J JULY 25, 2018/ak