- (1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. These petitions arise out of the common judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi, which was challenged before this Court by filing Special Leave Petition (C) No. 13639/2000 etc. and those Special Leave Petitions were dismissed by order dated 21/9/2000 (B. S. Khurana and Others v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Others [jt 2000 (10) SC 607]) It is apparent that the questions involved in these petitions are covered by the said judgment.
(2.) However, learned senior Counsel Mr. Gopal Subramaniam and Dr. A. M. Singhvi submitted that the petitioners are residents of Azadpur and Dhakka colonies and their case is similar to those residents of Nimri municipal colony, to whom the flats are allotted on the basis of direction given by Delhi High Court. They referred to decision of Delhi High Court in Nirmal Kumar Jain and Other v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Another [39 (1989) DLT 517] and submitted that the quarters in Azadpur, Dhakka and Nimri municipal colonies were constructed under a Government scheme which provided that after construction of the quarters, the said quarters were to be sold to the employees. It is, therefore, contended that the decision rendered in B. S. Khurana's case (supra) would not be applicable to the facts of the present case.
(3.) In our view, the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioners required to be rejected on the ground that for disposal of the property belonging to the Municipal Corporation, the Corporation is required to follow the provisions of Section 200 of Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). Admittedly, in the present case also, provisions of Section 200 of the Act are not complied with.;