ABDUL MUTALIB Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the unsuccessful plaintiff in a suit for declaration, mandatory and permanent injunction filed against the respondents herein.

(2.) The case of the plaintiff-appellant(hereinafter to be referred as the plaintiff ) was that he was running a dhaba since the year 1970 in Okhla Industrial Estate near factory no. 229 on a small piece of land. Other persons were also doing their business in that area like that. In the year 1981, the dhabas/stalls etc., where the plaintiff and others were doing their business, were ordered to be demolished as the same were unauthorisedly constructed and occupied on public land/pavements. In order to accommodate people like the plaintiff who were earning their livelihood from there and who would have been uprooted because of demolition of their dhabas/stalls a Scheme was framed by the Directorate of Industries, respondent no. 3 herein, for allotment of alternative sites to all those persons whose stalls were to be demolished. A survey was conducted and a list of those affected persons was prepared in which the plaintiff s name was also included. On 17.01.1985 the stalls/dhabas etc. were demolished and at the time of demolition a demolition slip was given to the plaintiff showing that stall no. 60 near factory no.74 in Okhla Industrial Estate was allotted to him temporarily with an assurance that he would be allotted one of the stalls being constructed, as per the Scheme, by the respondent no. 3 in Okhla Industrial Estate-III.

(3.) As per the further case of the plaintiff, when new stalls were constructed stall no. 68 in Okhla Industrial Estate-III came to be allotted to him but before the same could be formally handed over to him he went to Dubai. After coming back to India, he found that all the final allotments of the new stalls had been made to the concerned allottees except him. He then made representations before the defendant no. 3 but he was not allotted his stall no.68 and in fact he was further threatened to be evicted even from stall no. 60 where he had continued to run his dhaba and also that stall no. 68 would be auctioned.