PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.

( 1 ) PETITIONER is aggrieved by the order dated 22. 10. 2003 passed by the Lt. Governor in appeal No. 93/2003-CA. By said order, the lt. Governor reversed the order dated 2. 7. 2003 passed by the Appellate Tribunal, mcd in appeal No. 46/at-MCD/94. The appellate Tribunal, vide order dated 2. 7. 2003 upheld order dated 11. 1. 1994 revoking sanction obtained for further construction on property No. C-100, Anand Niketan, New delhi.

( 2 ) PETITIONER and his brother, late Shri k. L. Malik were the co-lessees of property bearing C-100, Anand Niketan, New Delhi by and under a perpetual sub-lease dated 11. 9. 1968. The land admeasures 423. 20 sq. yards.

( 3 ) AS per the petitioner, being a government servant, he was being posted outside Delhi. To facilitate construction of a building on the plot he executed a power of attorney on 13. 1. 1974 empowering his brother Late Shri k. L. Malik to act for and on his behalf and in his name pertaining to the property and in particular to deal with the municipal authorities to obtain necessary sanctions to construct a building. It is stated by the petitioner that since two brothers were co-lessees in equal share, they had, inter se, orally agreed to put to beneficial use the building to be constructed in the ratio of 50:50.

( 4 ) ACTING under the power of attorney dated 13. 2. 1974, late Shri K. L. Malik obtained sanction. A building was constructed. Total sanctioned cover area was 1904. 75 sq. feet.

( 5 ) THE building constructed had two separate and independent portions. One portion was taken possession of by the petitioner and the other by his late brother. As per the petitioner, he suspected that his brother had developed some evil intention in the year 1984. Lest the power of attorney dated 13. 2. 1974 be misused he revoked the same on 1. 10. 1985. He caused to be delivered, under registered post, a letter dated 1. 10. 1985 intimating revocation of the power of attorney. Said letter was received by the mcd evidenced by diary entry No. 4732/b.

( 6 ) AS per the petitioner, later Shri K. L. Malik connived with municipal authorities, in that, he utilized the revoked power of attorney executed by the petitioner in his favour and obtained a sanction to effect further constructions on 12. 1. 1993. Armed with the sanction aforesaid, Shri K. L. Malik effected further constructions on his allocated constructed portion and in this manner utilized the permissible additional coverage exclusively to himself. Petitioner took two actions. The first was by way of a suit for declaration, partition and permanent injunction. The second was by way of a complaint to the municipal authorities for revocation of the sanction obtained by his brother. Claim before the municipal authorities was on the ground that sanction was obtained by fraud and concealment, in as much as his brother had acted on his behalf under the power of attorney dated 13. 2. 1974 which was revoked by him on 1. 10. 1985.

( 7 ) THE municipal authorities proceeded to take cognizance of the complaint received by the petitioner. On 7. 9. 1993 the Additional commissioner (E) issued a show cause notice to late Shri K. L. Malik, drawing his attention to the complaint received from the petitioner. Shri K. L. Malik was required to show cause as to why the sanction granted be not revoked.

( 8 ) SHRI K. L. Malik responded to the show cause notice vide reply dated 24. 9. 1993. In his reply he defended his action by stating that he applied for additional construction in his portion and rightly acted under the power of attorney executed by the petitioner in his favour. He stated that notice of cancellation was never received by him.

( 9 ) THE matter was considered by the municipal authorities. Mr. J. N. Bhargava, additional Commissioner (E) vide order dated 11. 1. 1994 revoked the sanction.

( 10 ) ORDER dated 11. 1. 1994 noted that vide letter dated 1. 10. 1985 power of attorney executed by petitioner in favour of Shri k. L. Malik was re

Click Here to Read the rest of this document