VIVEKANAND PRATISTHAN PARISHAD REGD Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the demand of ground rent from the year 1989 as well as receipt of the draft lease-deed only on 10.10.1996, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It has been contended by Mr.Khadaria, learned counsel for the petitioner that initially five acres of land belonging to the petitioner Society was acquired by the Union of India in 1964, out of which two acres of land was allotted by the respondent/DDA to the petitioner society for a total sale consideration of Rs.1,97,000.00 for the purposes of establishment and construction of Vivekanand Hospital and Yoga Centre. The said money was deposited by the petitioner on 9.5.1985. However, possession of the land could not be given by the respondent since there was unauthorised and illegal occupation by the encroachers over the said land. It seems that the formal possession of land measuring 8000 sq.mtrs. was handed over to the petitioner, excluding some land which was unauthorisedly encroached, with the assurance that the regular possession of the land will be handed over to the petitioner after removal of the unauthorised encroachment. A letter was written by the petitioner on 29.5.1990 that regular possession of the land in question be handed over to the petitioner society so. as to enable the petitioner society to start hospital and other related activities. Similar requests were made by the petitioner through various letters which have been filed along with the paper-book. Vide its letter dated 19.9.1990 which is at page 32 of the paper-book, respondent/DDA stated as follows:

(2.) At page 49 of the paper-book is the no objection certificate in respect of the land of the petitioner from DDA, the same is dated 26.9.1995. At page 64 of the paper-book is the proposed lease-deed which has been sent to the petitioner, on 10.10.1996. On the basis of these documents, counsel for the petitioner has contended that when the actual physical possession of the land was given by the DDA on 21.8.1995, charging of ground rent from 1989 is totally illegal and arbitrary.

(3.) On the other hand, Ms. Ansuya Salwan, learned counsel for the respondent/DDA has contended that as the possession of the land was with the petitioner right from the beginning, the petitioner cannot take this plea and petitioner is liable to pay ground rent from the year 1989 as per clause (4) of the proposed lease-deed. It has been contended that out of five acres of land which was under the possession of the petitioner society and which was acquired by the Union of India, the entire possession was taken over on 8.7.1985 and out of said five acres, two acres were allotted to the petitioner society and a demand-cum-allotment letter was issued on 12.3.1985.