*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Date of Decision: 01.08.2013

+

W.P.(C) 1840/2012

ASSAN G TAJWANI

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr. Pradeep Dewan, Sr. Adv. with Ms.

Anupam Dhingra, Advs.

versus

LAND & DEVELOPMENT OFFICER & ANR.

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. Jatan Singh, CGSC and Mr. Soayib

Qureshi, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN

JUDGMENT

V.K.JAIN, J. (ORAL)

The father of the petitioner, namely, Shri Gyan Chand was the owner of

Property No. 5/37, Old Rajinder Nagar. Shri Gyan Chand died on 19.08.1983.

According to the petitioner, in his life time, late Shri Gyan Chand had executed a

Will dated 20.03.1976, thereby bequeathing the property in question solely to the

petitioner. The petitioner before this Court applied for grant of probate in regard to

the estate of late Shri Gyan Chand. The learned District Judge, vide order dated

26.07.1997, granted Letter of Administration with copy of the Will attached to it, in

favour of the petitioner. Pursuant to the said Letter of Administration, the

petitionerm vide application dated 12.02.2010 submitted on 18.03.2010, applied to

2013:DHC:3814

the Land and Development Officer for substitution of leasehold rights of the

aforesaid property in his name. On 16.04.2010, he submitted another application

for conversion of the said property into freehold property and also deposited a sum

of Rs 12,400/- towards conversion charges.

2. Vide communication dated 17.10.2011, the Land & Development Officer

allowed substitution of the leasehold rights in the aforesaid property in favour of

the petitioner. However, it was stated in clause 4 of the said letter, that substitution

of leasehold rights being not in the line of direct succession, the case had been

treated as a case of first transfer. It was further stated in the said letter that since

the petitioner was only an Administrator of the property, the property cannot be

converted into freehold. Thus, both the applications of the petitioner, one for

substitution of leasehold rights in his name and another for conversion of rights

from leasehold to freehold were dealt with by this order. Vide subsequent

communication dated 19.12.2011, the Deputy Land and Development Officer,

referring to the application of the petitioner dated 28.10.2011, whereby he had

raised objection in the matter of substitution in his name as administrator, intimated

that the letter dated 17.10.2011 had been issued as per probate order of the Court

and the legal opinion received by the office. It was reiterated that the request for

grant of conversion into freehold could not be acceded to. The conversion charges

paid by the petitioner were refunded vide communication dated 13/05.01.2012.

2013:DHC:3814

3. Being aggrieved from the refusal of the respondents to substitute the

leasehold rights of the aforesaid property in favour of the petitioner without any

rider/condition and to convert the said property into freehold, the petitioner is

before this Court seeking the following reliefs:-

“a) that by a writ of certiorari or appropriate writ, order or

directions may kindly be issued by this Hon'ble Court

quashing the letter LDO/PS-2/875 dated 17.10.2011

(Annexure P-10) refusing to convert the property No. 37,

Block No. 5, Old Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi into the

freehold property and treating the substitution of lease

hold rights as a case of first transfer, being illegal and

contrary to law and holding the petitioner as an

“Administrator”

and

the

letter

dated

5/13.1.12

(Annexures-P-14, 15 and 16) refusing to convert the

property into a free hold property)

b)

by a writ of mandamus or any other order,

direction or writ this Hon'ble Court may kindly be

pleased to direct the respondents to covert the property

No. 37, Block No. 5, Old Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi into

a freehold property upon payment of necessary charges,

execute a conve