Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
Vishwakarma Jan Sudhar Samiti RWA Block D-1, Jaitpur Extension-II - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 8412 of 2021
Decided On : 13-08-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. request for land inclusion in defined boundaries. (Para 2) |
| 2. contentions regarding unaddressed representations. (Para 3) |
| 3. court's directive for timely decision on petition. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. order to communicate decision and process. (Para 6) |
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (Oral)
CM APPL.25991/2021 (exemption)
Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 8412/2021
1. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.
2. Petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to include the land forming part of Block D-1, Vishwakarma Colony, Jaitpur Extension Part II, Delhi within the boundary of Jaitpur Extension Part-II.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has given several representations, however, the same has not been disposed of. He submits that in the notification issued the area covered by the residents of the petitioner society has been excluded from the boundaries of Jaitpur Extension colony Part II which is pending consideration for recognition.
4. Since the prayer of the petitioner is for the respondents to appropriately decide the representation/objections of the petitioner society seeking inclusion of Block D-1 within the delineated boundary of Jaitpur Extension Part II, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner by way of a speaking order in accordance with law preferably within a period of four months from today. The decision be taken after granting an opportunity of a personal hearing to the affected parties.
5. Petition is disposed of in the above terms reserving the right of the petitioner to avail of legal remedies if need so arises.
6. Copy of the order be uploaded on the High Court website and be also forwarded to learned counsels through email by the Court Master.
Authorities must issue reasoned decisions on representations and provide opportunities for personal hearings, ensuring due process in land boundary determinations.
The court emphasized the necessity for a timely and reasoned decision on representations affecting property rights, ensuring the petitioners receive a personal hearing.
Timely decision-making by public authorities on representations is essential, with courts emphasizing compliance with statutory obligations.
The necessity of affording a personal hearing in administrative proceedings is critical to upholding procedural fairness and natural justice.
Procedural fairness requires that parties must be given a personal hearing before administrative actions, failing which the orders may be set aside.
The court has the authority to direct demarcation of land and determine the method and costs of demarcation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for notices to be in conformity with previous court observations and to provide an opportunity for hearing to the affected parties ....
The court emphasized the importance of considering the petitioner's application for demarcation in accordance with the law and disposing of it expeditiously, with clear procedures for communication a....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
