SMT. NARGIS AND ORS. Vs. DDA AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT Letters Patent Appeal has been filed challenging the judgment dated 24th May, 2010 passed in WP(C) 13309/2009 whereby appellants -petitioners' prayer for allotment of alternative plots after demolition of jhuggis has been rejected by the learned Single Judge on the ground that appellants -petitioners did not meet the eligibility criteria.

(2.) MR . P. Chakraborty, learned Counsel for appellants stated that when the appellants were evicted on 16th January, 1988, they were in possession of ration cards. He further contended that after the survey of all the jhuggis, the claims of the appellants had been verified and they had been issued slips for alternative plots. Accordingly, Mr. Chakraborty submitted that respondent -DDA was under an obligation to hand over possession of plots bearing Nos. B -1/134, B -1/139, B -2/34, B -2/218, C -5/46 and C -5/54, Kondli Resettlement Colony to the appellants on the basis of specific draw held on 29th June, 1993.

(3.) HAVING heard learned Counsel for the appellants and having perused the paper book, we are of the opinion that jhuggi dwellers have no legal vested rights to claim allotment of an alternative residential plot. The right for an alternative plot only flows from the policy, if any, framed by the respondent -DDA. Consequently, the appellants would be entitled to an alternative plot only if they are so eligible under the respondent -DDA's policy in vogue, namely, the policy dated 8th May, 1989 read with policy dated 12th September, 2003. We are further of the opinion that allocation of a demolition slip or allotment on the basis of draw would not entitle the appellants to an alternative plot irrespective of the fact whether they fulfil the condition precedent stipulated in the policy framed by the respondent -DDA.