SANJEEV SACHDEVA
Prem Ghai – Appellant
Versus
District Magistrate North – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.:-- (Oral)
1. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.
2. Petitioner impugns order dated 28.10.2020 whereby the application of the petitioner dated 15.01.2004 for allotment of an alternative plot in lieu of his land acquired in village Shahbad Daulatpur, Delhi has been rejected.
3. With the consent of parties, the petition is taken up hearing today.
4. The impugned order dated 28.10.2020 records that two notices were issued to the petitioner but petitioner failed to submit the requisite documents.
5. The case of the petitioner is that petitioner never received the said notices or became aware of any notice published in the newspaper as their predecessor-in-interest i.e. their father had expired in the year 2009.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are residents of Jalandhar, Punjab and as such were never aware of the requirement of furnishing any further documents to the respondents.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on a judgment dated 01.10.2018 in W.P(C)11557/2017 titled Rishi Pal vs. Land & Building Department wherein in similar circumstances the matter has been remitted to the respondents to recons
The court emphasized the importance of complying with notice requirements and submitting requisite documents in applications for allotment of alternative plots, while also directing expeditious consi....
The court emphasized that failure to receive notices does not negate the petitioner's right to due process, allowing reconsideration of their application for an alternative plot.
Failure to submit requisite documents within the specified time frame may be reconsidered if the petitioner subsequently produces the necessary documentation.
The court emphasized the importance of procedural fairness, allowing reconsideration of applications when new evidence is presented, even if initial requirements were not met.
A petitioner cannot invoke Article 226 based on an application made 54 years after the initial policy deadline due to gross delay and laches.
The main legal point established is that applications for alternative plot allotment made in line with the respondent's advice and within the specified time should not be rejected based on limitation....
The exemption of the limitation period granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court during the COVID-19 pandemic can be relied upon to justify the delay in approaching the court.
Respondents unjustly dismissed the petitioner's application for an alternative plot due to lack of notified requirements, leading the court to quash the decision and remand the case for fresh conside....
The court emphasized the importance of considering the documents submitted by the petitioner and granting them an opportunity of hearing in the case of allotment of an alternative plot.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.