Disposed¶8

Vidaya Devi v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC15 Jan 2025W.P.(C)/11747/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court writ disposal; Article 226; alternative/rehabilitation land allotment in lieu of acquired land; Munirka Mohammadpur Samlat 1561; 1993 allotment approval never communicated; communication dated 24.03.1993; RTI 2020 file not traced; delay/laches noticed but not fatal; no counter affidavit despite time granted 08.01.2024; disposal on same terms as companion W.P.(C) 2313/2017; GNCTD directed to examine and communicate orders or pass fresh orders within eight weeks; rights and contentions left open; single-judge bench Prateek Jalan, J.; decided 15.01.2025.

What did the court decide?

Respondents (GNCTD & Anr.) directed to examine the matter and communicate any orders already passed, or pass fresh orders, to the petitioner within eight weeks from 15.01.2025; all rights and contentions of the parties left open. ¶8

Vidaya Devi Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr. — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶8

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents should be directed to consider the petitioner's long-pending request for allotment of alternative land in lieu of acquired land and communicate any orders made, if any, to her.

¶4

Court's answer

Since no order has been communicated to the petitioner at all and no counter affidavit was filed despite time granted on 08.01.2024, the writ petition is disposed of on the same terms as W.P.(C) 2313/2017: the respondents are directed to examine the matter and communicate any orders already passed, or pass fresh orders, to the petitioner within eight weeks.

¶8

Key takeaways

All rights and contentions of the parties are left open.obiter¶9

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Prateek Jalan, J., 15.01.2025) disposed of W.P.(C) 11747/2023, in which Vidaya Devi, invoking Article 226 of the Constitution, sought a direction to GNCTD & Anr. to allot her a property in lieu of her late husband's acquired land at Samlat 1561, Village Mohammadpur, Munirka. She claimed the alternative-land allotment was approved in 1993 (documents sought by communication dated 24.03.1993), but no final order was ever communicated; a 2020 RTI query elicited a reply that the file was not readily available. Though the Court had noticed the delay in filing at the notice stage (05.09.2023), and though no counter affidavit was filed despite time granted on 08.01.2024, the Court — following the same-day disposal of the companion W.P.(C) 2313/2017 filed by other family members of the original landowner — disposed of this petition on the same terms: the respondents are to examine the matter and communicate any orders already passed, or pass fresh orders, to the petitioner within eight weeks; all rights and contentions left open.

¶1

$~11

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) -11747/2023

¶4

VIDAYA DEVI .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Dr. Meenakshi Kalra, Mr. S.N. Kalra, Mr. Kamal, Ms. G. Meghana, Ms. Rushali Sikand and Ms. Anjali Chaudhary, Advocates. versus

¶5

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Shivani Yadav, Advocate.

¶6

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN

¶7

O R D E R % 15.01.2025

¶8

The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, for a direction upon the respondents to allot a property to her in lieu of acquired land.

¶9

The petitioner’s case is that the land belonging to her husband at Samlat 1561, Village Mohammadpur, Munirka, New Delhi , was acquired, and an application was thereafter made for allotment of alternative land. It is the case of the petitioner that she was informed that the allotment of alternative land to her was, in fact, approved in the year 1993. My attention is drawn to a communication dated 24.03.1993, by which certain documents were sought from the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the documents were duly submitted.

¶10

However, the petitioner states that she did not receive any final

¶11

Page 1 of 3

¶12

W.P.(C) 11747/2023

¶13

This is a digitally signed order.

¶14

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/01/2025 at 14:55:41

¶15

order of allotment or communication with regard to her request and therefore approached this Court thirty years later. The petitioner sought information from the respondent’s office under the Right to Information Act, 2005, in the year 2020 but has been informed that the file is not readily available and that a reply would be given once the file is traced.

¶16

In these circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks a direction that the respondents will consider the case and communicate orders made, if any, to the petitioner.

¶17

While issuing notice in this case on 05.09.2023, the Court noticed the delay in the filing of the case but directed that the matter be listed alongwith W.P.(C) 2313/2017 filed by other family members of the original land owner.

¶18

The said writ petition has been disposed of today with the following directions:

¶19

“ 10. In these circumstances, GNCTD is directed to address a comprehensive communication to the petitioner, detailing the facts and grounds if the petitioner’s request is to be rejected, within eight weeks.” 7. In view of the fact that in the present case, no order has been communicated to the petitioner at all, learned counsel states that she would be satisfied with a similar order.

¶20

Despite time having been granted for filing of counter affidavits for the first time on 08.01.2024, no counter affidavit has yet been filed. In these circumstances, I am of the view that it would be appropriate to dispose of the writ petition on the same terms. The respondents are directed to examine the matter and communicate any orders which have already been passed or to pass fresh orders thereupon to the petitioner

¶21

Page 2 of 3

¶22

W.P.(C) 11747/2023

¶23

This is a digitally signed order.

¶24

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/01/2025 at 14:55:41

¶25

within a period of eight weeks from today.

¶26

All rights and contentions of the parties are left open.

¶27

PRATEEK JALAN, J

¶28

JANUARY 15, 2025/ MR/JM/

¶29

Page 3 of 3

¶30

W.P.(C) 11747/2023

¶31

This is a digitally signed order.

¶32

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 24/01/2025 at 14:55:41

Vidaya Devi v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vidaya Devi v. Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pragati Defence Systems Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India & Ors.

M/S Hyderabad Cable Digital Service Pvt. Ltd. Vs Zee Entertainment Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.

Sewa Ram Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Anr.

Sanrok Enterpreses Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 28 (1) Delhi

Prakash Industries Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 30, Delhi & Anr.

M/S Royal Security Services Vs Jaipal Singh and Ors.

Fci Handling Workers Union Vs UOI & Anr.

Rajesh Gomes Vs New Delhi Municipal Council (Ndmc) and Ors.

Rashmi Kant Mittal Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi and Others

Geeta Luthra Vs S.M. Bagley Associates Pvt. Ltd.

Smt Kamla Devi Vs Government of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Randhir Singh Vs Land & Building Department

Ravi Kapoor Vs Rukmani Devi

Vikas Vs Union of India & Anr.