Petitioner challenged rejection of alternate plot allotment due to non-submission of documents showing land acquisition. Court treated petition as representation and directed respondent to pass reasoned order within three months.
Petition treated as representation; respondent to pass reasoned order within three months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~4
SHRI JAVIEER SINGH ..... Petitioner Through Mr.N.S.Dalal with Ms.Toral Banerjee, Advocates.
versus
LAND AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT ..... Respondent Through Ms.Ruchika Rathi, Advocate.
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI
O R D E R
Vide the present petition, the petitioner has impugned the order dated 13.11.2017 passed by the respondent/Land and Building Department, whereby his application for allotment of alternate plot has been rejected on the ground that he had failed to furnish the requisite documents to show that his entire land stood acquired.
Today, Ms.Ruchika Rathi, learned counsel for the respondent, submits that it appears that the petitioner’s case was rejected since the requisite documents to show that his entire land had been acquired, had not made available to the Recommendation Committee when the matter was considered by the Committee. She, however, submits that in view of the submissions now made by the petitioner as also the fact that the requisite documents have now been filed alongwith the petition, to show that his entire land stood acquired, the petitioner
may be approach the respondent by way of a representation which would be duly considered.
At this learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the respondent be directed to treat the present petition as a representation and take a considered decision thereon in a time-bound manner. Learned counsel for the respondent has no objection to the aforesaid course of action.
The respondent is directed to consider the present writ petition as a representation and pass a reasoned and speaking order therein within three months. It is, however, clarified that in case the respondent finds any deficiency in the petitioner’s documents and requires any further documents from the petitioner, the respondent would give him an opportunity to do the needful within a period of two weeks. The said documents would also be considered by the respondent while passing a speaking order.
The present petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid directions.
REKHA PALLI, J
FEBRUARY 15, 2018 sr
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be permitted to treat the writ petition as a representation regarding the rejection of his alternate plot allotment application due to missing documents.
Shri Javier Singh
Land and Building Department
Rekha Palli
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
