J C DEY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) After hearing Counsel for the parties I understand the grievance of the petitioners to relate to the failure of allotment of shops on terms identical to those 96 persons, whose eligibility was forwarded by the Screening Committee of the Government with the assistance of the EPDP Association. The criteria for conforming eligibility included the following: (1) Certified copies of Citizenship Certificate. (2) Migration Certificate. (3) Refugee Registration Certificate. (4) Border slips. (5) Certified copies of National Census Register. (6) Certified copy of the first page of the Service Book.

(2.) On verification of these documents, as already mentioned, 96 persons were found eligible for allotment of alternative shop sites at half the prevailing rate, in substitution of the areas in which they were squatting. The verification was carried out from 1984 to 1988. It has been explained that allotment took place in 2004 for the reason that the respondents had to make available to the affected persons an interim site in order to facilitate the squatters to carry on their trade in the interregnum from that site with the ultimate objective of eventually moving to the shops constructed by the respondents. The group of 96 persons have been allotted shops on the ground floor at half the rate applicable to the other group of twelve persons in which the present eight petitioners fall.

(3.) The petitioners have paid 25% of the cost of the shops as the amount demanded by the respondents and have received their allotments. Having acted upon the scheme, and having enjoyed its fruits, ordinarily they would be estopped from raising objections thereto, especially in writ proceedings.