GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI Vs. JAI GOPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short question that falls for our consideration is whether the respondent is entitled to allotment of an alternative land in terms of the Welfare Scheme notified by the Government of NCT of Delhi to rehabilitate the "agriculturists" whose lands were acquired by the Government.

(2.) THE facts are few and may be briefly stated. The respondent purchased land measuring 4 bighas and 12 biswas comprising khasra No. 59/25, which was situated in the revenue estate of Rithala, delhi under a registered sale deed dated 28th November, 1981, which was registered in the office of the Sub Registrar II, Delhi on 30th November, 1981. By a notification bearing No. F-11 (15)/8-L and B issued on 31st December, 1981 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, the respondent's land was notified for compulsory acquisition. The respondent also approached the concerned revenue authorities for mutation of the demised land in his favour and orders in that behalf were passed by the concerned Tehsildar on 15th July, 1982. The order records that the vendor of the land was represented before the tehsildar whose statement was recorded. The Tehsildar has also taken on record a copy of the sale deed which was placed before him. The acquisition proceedings culminated in the passing of an award dated 10th September, 1985 and that compensation towards acquisition of the subject land was paid to the respondent on 27th April, 1994.

(3.) THE respondent applied for grant of plot against the land, which was acquired under the award dated 10th September, 1985, which was received by the competent authority on 1st August, 1994. The respondent also annexed the documents including the sale deed in his favour along with the application. As there was no response and no information was forthcoming, the respondent was constrained to approach this Court by means of a writ petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India. The writ petition was opposed by the appellants on the sole ground that both the sale deed of the respondent and mutation of the property were required to be prior to the notification under Section 4 of the land Acquisition Act, 1894. As mutation in the revenue records was not prior to that date, the respondent was not eligible for grant of an alternative plot pursuant to the scheme of the appellant as he did not satisfy the eligibility conditions.