The relevant date for assessing eligibility criteria for allotment of an alternate plot under the 1961 Scheme is the date of allotment, and the ownership of a residential plot by the applicant or their dependent relations can create a hurdle in eligibility.

INDERMEET KAUR, J.

1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the letter of rejection dated 19.05.2015 issued by respondent No. 1 wherein his application seeking allotment of an alternate plot was rejected. By this letter, it was informed to the petitioner that his case for allotment of an alternate plot in lieu of his acquired land had been placed before the Recommending Committee on 25.02.2015; the Recommending Committee was of the view that the spouse of the petitioner having purchased an urbanized property bearing No.C-5/A/219, Janakpuri, Delhi in her name, the case of the petitioner would not be covered under the Policy Guidelines entitling him to an alternate plot. His case was accordingly rejected.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved. The vehement submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that admittedly on the date when he had applied for allotment of an alternate plot which was on 11.07.2003 neither did the petitioner and nor did his wife own any plot of land. Admittedly the wife of the petitioner had purchased the aforenoted plot of land only subsequently i.e. in the year 2004; the criteria for the eligibility of an alternate plot had to be considered by the Department on the date of his application and not at the time when they had scrutinized his documents; this letter of rejection thus suffers from an infirmity.

3. Counter affidavit of the respondent has negated these submissions. The Policy of the Government has also been placed on record.

4 On the perusal of the record, this Court notes that the land of the petitioner had been acquired on 27.10.1999; possession was taken over by respondent No. 1 on 08.05.2000. Compensation for the acquired land was given to the petitioner on 25.07.2002. The petitioner filed an application under the scheme for allotment of an alternate plot on 11.07.2003. Admittedly on that date, neither did the petitioner nor did his wife have any land in his name. The petitioner had purchased the aforenoted plot in the name of his wife in the year 2004. All these are admitted facts.

5. The only question which this Court has to answer as to whether the Policy of the Government entitling a party to allotment of an alternate plot which admittedly provides that neither the applicant and nor his spouse/dependent children at the relevant date should have any independent house in their name in a residential area; what would be the relevant date i.e. whether it would be the date of filing of the application or the date when the documents are scrutinized by the Department? This is the question which has to be answered.

6. On 10.06.2014, pursuant to a communication dated 17.02.2014 from the Department, the petitioner had submitted his additional documents. During the scrutiny of these documents which had been supplied by the petitioner to the respondent, it had come to light that the wife of the petitioner had acquired an alternate plot on 02.06.2004.

7. At this stage, it would also be useful to extract the eligibility criteria of the Government which had been approved by the Government of NCT of Delhi in the year 1961 dealing with allotment of alternate plots. The object of the scheme reads as under:-

“The scheme of providing developed residential plots to farmers whose lands are acquired for planned development of Delhi is a rehabilitation measure”

8. The object thus clearly being to provide developed residential plots to farmers whose land had been acquired for the planned development of Delhi; this being a rehabilitative measure.

9. This scheme had come into force w.e.f 02.05.1961. The eligibility criteria (where acquired land is ancestral) reads as under:-

“1. The persons who are RECORDED OWNER prior to issue of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act.

2. The persons whose lands have been acquired must have received the compensation as rightful owners from the LAC/Court and the Govt. has taken the possession of acquired land.

3. The applicants should not own a house/residential plot/fl