Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J.

1. These intra-court appeals impugn the common judgment dated 10th May, 2013 of the learned Single Judge of this Court of dismissal of W.P.(C) No.3036/2013 and W.P.(C) No.3058/2013 filed by the appellants respectively.

2. Notices of the appeals were issued and on 27th September, 2013, the appeals were admitted to hearing. A counter affidavit has been filed in LPA No.444/2013 and which has been adopted in the other appeal as well. We have heard the counsel for the parties.

3. The writ petitions from which these appeals arise were filed, a) impugning the two identical letters, both dated 8th April, 2013, of the Land and Building Department of the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) issued to the appellants respectively, informing them that their request for separate alternative plots in lieu of acquired land had been rejected on the ground that the acquired land had been purchased by the appellants jointly along with some other persons; and, b) seeking a direction to the respondents to allot separate alternative plots to each of the appellants against the acquired land. It was inter alia the case of each of the appellants in the writ petition filed by them:-

(i) that the appellants who are brothers, along with another brother had purchased the land which was subsequently acquired, vide single Sale Deed executed in their names;

(ii) that the said land, on the basis of the said Sale Deed, was mutated in the revenue records in the name of the appellants and their another brother;

(iii) that upon acquisition of the said land under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, each of the two appellants and their another brother was paid compensation of his/her respective share;

(iv) that each of the appellants separately applied for alternative plot in lieu of acquired land under the Scheme of Delhi Administration of the year 1961 as amended from time to time; and,

(v) that just like they were separately paid compensation for land acquisition according to their respective shares in the acquired land, the two appellants and their another brother were similarly entitled to separate alternative plots in accordance with their respective shares in the acquired land.

4. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petitions, finding/observing/ holding:

(a) that there is absolutely no provision in the Scheme of allotment of alternative plots which entitles the owners of jointly owned land to allotment of individual alternative plots of sizes as per their share in the acquired land;

(b) logically also if the acquired land was owned by two or more persons, the alternative plot also should be allotted jointly to all of them;

(c) that in the absence of any provision in the Scheme, entitling the joint owners of acquired land to allotment of individual alternative plots, it cannot be said that all joint owners should get individual alternative plots in accordance with their share in the acquired land; and,

(d) that the benefit available to the legal heirs of a person who died before the issue of Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act cannot be extended to the appellants since that would amount to modification by the Court of the Scheme framed by the Government and particularly when no challenge to the Scheme had been made in the petitions.

5. The counsel for the appellants has drawn our attention to the relevant provisions of the Scheme which are as under:

“SCHEME

This Department is implementing Scheme of allotment of alternative plots in lieu of acquired land under “Large Scale Acquisition Development & Disposal of Land in Delhi” announced by Govt. of India, Ministry of Home Affairs vide their letter No.37/16/60-Delhi (i) dated 2nd May, 1961.

This scheme is in force with effect from 2.5.61. The department has been inviting applications for grant of alternative plots through press advertisements from time to time. The plots are allotted by the D.D.A. on the recommendation of this d