SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
Vinod Kumar Gupta - Appellant
Versus
SDM(HQ) - Respondent
W.P.(C) 4358 of 2021 & CM Appl. 13283 of 2021
Decided On : 16-08-2021




The court emphasized the importance of procedural fairness, allowing reconsideration of applications when new evidence is presented, even if initial requirements were not met.

Headnote:(A) Land Acquisition Act - The petitioner challenged the order rejecting the application for allotment of an alternative plot, citing failure to submit documents within the specified time. Court emphasized the right to a personal hearing after evidence was produced. (Paras 2-7)

(B) Administrative Procedure - The failure to submit complete documentation did not invalidate the right to reconsideration upon providing necessary documentation. (Para 6)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner contended that he was unable to submit the title deed due to ongoing disputes with the landlord. After tracing the registration details, the petitioner produced a certified copy of the sale deed for reconsideration.

Findings of Court:
The court determined that the basis for the rejection of the application no longer stood and ordered the case to be remitted for a fresh hearing, thus upholding procedural fairness.

Issues: The main issue addressed was the justification for rejecting the application based on the non-submission of documents and the rights of the petitioner to present additional evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that procedural due process must be afforded, allowing for reconsideration based on new evidence, reinforcing the principle of fair hearing.

Result: The impugned order set aside; matter remitted for reconsideration.

Table of Content
1. failure to submit requisite documents for land allotment. (Para 2 , 3)
2. arguments regarding tenant's inability to produce ownership documents. (Para 4 , 5)
3. court's view on the impugned order's basis. (Para 6)
4. remittance of the matter for reconsideration. (Para 7)
5. disposition of the petition and guidelines for further action. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (ORAL)--The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.

2. Petitioner impugns order dated 21.01.2021 whereby the application of the petitioner for allotment of an alternative plot as per the Government policy in lieu of acquisition of land of Village Sanoth vide award No.17/2003-04 has been rejected solely on the ground that petitioner has failed to submit the requisite documents within 15 days.

3. The impugned order records that petitioner has not submitted the complete documents i.e. title deed of property No.4353/55, Second Floor, Naya Bazar, Delhi.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a tenant in the subject property and had produced the rent receipt. He submits that as there is an ongoing dispute with the landlord, petitioner was not in a position to produce the original sale deed of the said property.

5. Learned counsel submits that with great difficulty petitioner had been able to trace out the registration details of the sale deed and has accordingly obtained a certified copy of the sale deed of property with regard to second floor with terrace roof rights having an area measuring 100.33 sq.mtrs being part of the northern side portion of property No.4053 to 4055 situated at Naya Bazar, Lahori Gate, Delhi.

6. In view of the fact that petitioner has now produced the sale deed dated 16.06.2016 of the second floor allegedly of the subject property, I am of the view that the very basis of impugned order does not survive any further and accordingly the same calls for a remit.

7. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 21.01.2021 is set aside. Matter is remitted to the Recommendation Committee for reconsideration. The Committee shall give an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and thereafter pass a fresh speaking order expeditiously.

8. All rights and contentions of parties are reserved.

9. Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

10. Copy of the Order be uploaded on the High Court website and be also forwarded to learned counsels through email.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top