SOHAN LAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The decision of the learned Single Judge dated 29.11.1984 partly dismissing the Appellant's writ petition No.283 of 1983 is under challenge in this appeal.

(2.) The Appellant in his writ petition had sought quashing of an order dated 26.10.1982 passed by the Delhi Administration cancelling the allotment of plot No. A-2/59, Paschimpuri, West Zone, New Delhi, on the ground that the Appellant had concealed that he had applied earlier for alternative plot of land under the Scheme "Large Scale Acquisition, Development and Disposal of Land in Delhi" and the order dated 17.12.1982 passed by the Delhi Development Authority forfeiting the premium of Rs. 13,382.00 .

(3.) The Appellant on 13.12.1971 filed an application for allotment of an alternative plot in lieu of his acquired land. After necessary enquiry, a recommendation was made by the Delhi Administration, (Land & Building Department) in its letter dated 26.05.1979 to the Delhi Development Authority for allotment of 250 sq. yds in Appellant's favour in West Zone. The plot bearing No.A-2/59, situated at Paschimpuri, New Delhi measuring 167.226 sq. mts. was alloted in the name of the Appellant vide letter dated 15.01.1980, The Appellant was called upon to make the payment of the premium and other charges. Pursuant to the said demand the Appellant deposited a sum of Rs. 13,382.00 . Before lease deed could be executed in Appellant's favour, Delhi Administration asked the Appellant to produce a cy of jamabandi of the acquired land. At that stage, according to the respondents, it transpired that the Appellant had earlier applied for allotment of an alternative plot and his application was processed vide File No. 39/11/46/64-L&H. It was also noticed that column No. 11 of the second application dated 13.12.1971 had been kept blank by the Appellant and no information was furnished to the question that whether any application for allotment of any alternative plot was submitted earlier? Treating it to be a case of non disclosure of the correct particulars thereby amounting to concealment of material facts and misrepresentation of fact the Appellant was called upon to explain as to why prosecution be not launched against him. Reply to the notice was filed by the Appellant on 01.07.1982. During those proceedings personal hearing was afforded to the Appellant. Instead of launching prosecution against the appellant decision was taken on 26.10.1982 to withdraw the recommendation. Consequent to the withdrawal of recommendation, the Delhi Development Authority passed an order on 17.12.1982 forfeiting the premium paid by the Appellant.