Decided on May 24,2022



SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD,J. - (1.)The instant application has been filed for recalling the order dtd. 16/3/2018 by which the contempt petition being CONT.CAS(C) 205/2017 was withdrawn.
(2.)The petitioner had filed CONT.CAS(C) 205/2017 alleging that the respondents are not implementing the order dtd. 30/5/2016 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 5198/2016.
(3.)The facts, in brief, leading to the instant petition are as under:-
i. The petitioner's land had been acquired by the Land and Building Department, Delhi Administration in the year 1968. At the relevant time, apart from the compensation that has to be paid, persons whose lands were acquired were to be allotted residential plot/commercial space/shop, or compassionate employment to one of their family members for rehabilitating the family who lost their lands.

ii. It is stated that the petitioner's grandfather, whose land had been acquired had applied for allotment of an alternate plot. The petitioner, who succeeded his grandfather, started pursuing the allotment to be made to him in terms of the rehabilitation policy. However, as the petitioner's request was not included in the seniority list of allotment, the petitioner filed W.P.(C) 2019/2013. On being informed that his name was being included, the said writ petition was withdrawn by the petitioner.

iii. It is stated that after the Petitioner 's name was included in the seniority list, his name was thereafter rejected on the ground that the recorded owner, i.e. the petitioner's grandfather, had not applied for an alternate plot in his lifetime. The petitioner filed W.P.(C) 2695/2014 challenging the order dtd. 27/11/2013 passed by the Land and Building Department by which the petitioner's case for alternate allotment was rejected. This Court vide judgment dtd. 12/8/2014 allowed the writ petition of the petitioner and directed the Land and Building Department to reconsider the representation of the petitioner.

iv. Pursuant to the orders of this Court, the Land and Building Department vide communication dtd. 6/4/2016 made a recommendation to the DDA regarding allotment of a plot admeasuring 250 sq. yds. to the petitioner.

v. Since nothing was being done for the allotment of plot, the petitioner filed W.P.(C) 5198/2016. On 30/5/2016, W.P.(C)5198/2016 was disposed of by this Court directing the DDA to consider the representation of the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of the order and the decision was to be communicated to the petitioner within a period of two weeks. Accordingly, the petitioner filed a representation with the DDA and prayed for allotment of a plot admeasuring 250 sq. yds at Sector 23, Pocket 4 and 7, Dwarka, Delhi. However, as the representation was not considered within the stipulated time limit, the petitioner was constrained to move this Court by way of the instant contempt petition being CONT.CAS(C) 205/2017.

vi. Notice in the contempt petition was issued on 12/5/2017. The order sheet reveals that when Draw of Lots was being held for allotment of plots at Dwarka, the petitioner filed CM. APPLN.19528/2017 seeking the following prayer:-

"To reserve the plot no. 31, Block-C, Pkt-8, Sector-17, Dwarka, New Delhi having area of 207 sq. mt in favour of the petitioner till the disposal of the present writ petition; "

vii. On 23/5/2017, learned counsel for the DDA assured the Court that the position of the vacant plots at Dwarka would be disclosed, and the apprehension expressed by the petitioner that the Draw of Lots will be held and the petitioner will be deprived of a plot was uncalled for.

viii. On 17/8/2017, this Court was informed that there were 104 plots admeasuring 250 sq. yds. but no time had been fixed for the Draw of Lots. It was stated that the seniority list was yet to be finalised.

ix. During the course of the hearing, this Court was informed that the petitioner was placed at Serial No.1 of the seniority list for the allotment of plot and this Court vide order dtd. 17/8/2017 observed that the petitioner, who is the third generation fighting for the allotment of plot, should be given a plot by a Mini Draw of Lots, if required.

x. On 11/12/2017, learned counsel for the DDA handed over a copy of the communication dtd. 8/12/2017 vide Diary No. F.27(29)2005/LAB(R)/2234 stating that the direction given by this Court had been complied with as Plot No. 188, Pocket 4 and 6, Sector-26, Dwarka admeasuring 250 sq. yds. had been allotted to the petitioner vide order dtd. 8/12/2017.

xi. Accordingly, the petitioner moved an application being CM. APPLN. 10344/2018 for withdrawal of the contempt petition. After withdrawal of the contempt petition on 16/3/2018, the petitioner was informed by the DDA that the allotment made by the DDA in favour of the petitioner has been cancelled vide letter dtd. 21/8/2018 passed by the DDA.

xii. A perusal of the material on record indicates that the allotment was withdrawn because of the fact that the acquisition by which the said plot had been acquired had lapsed under Sec. 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as 'The New Land Acquisition Act ') which was interpreted in terms of judgment passed in Jayawanti and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors., W.P.(C) 2579/2017.

xiii. The petitioner has, therefore, filed an application for recalling the order dtd. 16/3/2018 and for initiating contempt proceedings against the respondents.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.