Mukundakam Sharma, C.J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 10th September, 2007 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant herein.

2. The appellant herein alleged that he was in possession of the land bearing khasra No. 436 (4-16), 446 (4-16) and 445 (4016), situated in the revenue estate of Village Bhalaswa Jahangirpur, Delhi to the extent of one and half share in the said khasra numbers. The said land was notified for acquisition on 15th September, 2000. Declaration under Sections 6 and 17 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 17th April, 2001 and the award was made on 12th April, 2002.

3. In July 2002, the appellant along with his brother Shri Yogender filed an application for compensation. On reference from the Land Acquisition Collector for adjudication, the learned Additional District Judge, Delhi by order dated 22nd March 2003, held that, though it is admitted fact that Gaon Sabha is the recorded owner of the land in question, but as the appellant and his brother were in actual, physical and cultivatory possession of land in question continuously for a period of more than 10 years prior to its acquisition, they acquired bhumidari rights under Section 85 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act and are entitled to entire amount of compensation assessed by Land Acquisition Collector i.e. Rs. 61,91,273.49. As stated by the appellant before the learned Single Judge and also before us the appellant has received the said amount in proportion to his entitlement.

4. Subsequently, on 30th July 2003, appellant also applied for allotment of an alternative plot under the Scheme of Large Scale Acquisition, Development and Disposal of Land in Delhi, 1961, in lieu of acquisition of his land. By letter/order dated 20th September, 2005 it was informed to the appellant that his request for allotment of alternative plot was rejected as he does not fulfilll the preliminary eligibility condition. The said letter is reproduced below for reference:

To

Shri Gulshan,

S/o Shri Surinder Singh,

R/o House No. 82,

Village Bhulswa Jahangirpur,

Delhi-33

Sub: Allotment of alternative plot under the Scheme of Large Scale Acquisition, Development and Disposal of land in Delhi, 1961

Sir,

With reference to your application dated 30.07.2003, on the subject cited above, I am directed to inform you that under the policy of the department for allotment of alternative plots as a preliminary eligibility condition the applicant is required to the recorded owner of the acquired alnd(land) prior to the date of notification Under Section 4 of LA Act. In you(your) case, notification Under Section 4 of La Act was issued on 15.09.2000.

Your case was thereforee considered by the allotment committee of the department and rejected on the ground that the applicant was not found to be recorded owner of the land prior to the date of notification Under Section 4 of LA Act. This issues with the prior approval of the Pr. Secretary (L and B)

Yours faithfully,

Deputy Director (Alt.)

Thus the claim of the appellant was rejected on the ground that prior to 15th September, 2000, the date on which the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued, he was not found to be the recorded owner of the land in question.

5. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid position, a writ petition was filed by the appellant. During the pendency of the aforesaid proceeding before the learned Single Judge, the appellant also sought amendment of the writ petition on the ground that the 1961 policy was arbitrary, but no amendment to the prayer clause was sought. The learned Single Judge held that as the acquisition was made in 2000, the present case is not governed by 1961 policy which stood replaced by the Delhi Development Authority (Disposal of Developed Nazul Land) Rules, 1981. The learned Single Judge, while dismissing the writ petition, also referred to the observation made by