SUNHILL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS intra-court appeal impugns the order dated 04.05.2011 of the learned Single Judge dismissing W.P.(C) No.6825/2008 preferred by the appellants. The appellants had applied for review before the learned Single Judge and the application for review was also dismissed on 28.11.2011. Though the appeal has been preferred with an application for condonation of delay of 88 days in filing the same but since the counsel for the contesting respondent No.1 DDA appears, and considering the nature of the controversy, we have with the consent of the counsels for the parties, heard the appeal finally.

(2.) THE appellant Society had applied to the respondent No.1 DDA and the respondent No.2 Directorate of Education of the Government of NCT of Delhi (GNCTD) for allotment of land for establishing a School. On the said application , the appellant Society in July, 1986, was allotted a piece of land admeasuring 3.15 acres and the appellant Society deposited a sum of Rs. 7,75,098/- towards premium thereof. However, the Ministry of Defence disputed the entitlement of the respondent No.1 DDA to allot the said land and claimed that the land was owned by the said Ministry. THE appellant Society in the circumstances, filed W.P.(C) No.2761/1986. THE said writ petition was dismissed on 11.05.1987 finding that the land in fact belonged to the Ministry of Defence and the respondent No.1 DDA had no right to allot the same. Though the appellant Society preferred a Special Leave Petition to the Supreme Court against the dismissal of the said writ petition but without any success. THE amount of Rs. 7,75,098/- deposited by the appellant Society was refunded.

(3.) THE counsel for the appellants has contended that all that the appellants are seeking is for their claim to be considered by the Lieutenant Governor being the Competent Authority and before whom as per the notings on the file also, the file was to be placed and has not been placed. It is further contended that the learned Single Judge had in fact vide order dated 08.02.2011 directed the counsel for the respondent No.1 DDA to produce the records to verify whether the file had been so placed before the Lieutenant Governor or not; however inspite of file having been produced by the respondent No.1 DDA and though, finding the same to have been not placed before the Lieutenant Governor, still dismissed the writ petition. Though not disputing that the appellants had sought refund of the amount deposited with the respondent DDA for the plot of land earlier allotted, it is contended that the same was, as per the advice of the respondent No.1 DDA only. Attention is invited to the letter dated 05.06.2000 of the respondent No.1 DDA where the respondent No.1 DDA while dealing with the allotment to be made in favour of the appellant Society, referred to the same as of "alternative site". It is also argued that even while making the application dated 15.03.1999 for allotment after the earlier allotment was cancelled, the appellants had sought allotment "near about .........old land".