Smt. Saroj @ Suraj v. Delhi Development Authority and Anr.

Delhi HC19 Jan 2026W.P.(C)/9000/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Delhi High Court; W.P.(C) 9000/2019; Smt. Saroj @ Suraj v. Delhi Development Authority; Article 226 Constitution of India; writ of mandamus; DDA plot allotment; land acquisition; LAC recommendation; mini draw of lots; Village Narela Pocket 3 Sector A5; 70 sq mts (83.71 sq yards); petition disposed on consent/statements; non-precedential order; Jasmeet Singh, J.; order dated 19.01.2026.

What did the court decide?

Respondents to conduct a mini draw and allot a plot of 70 sq mts (83.71 sq yards) at Village Narela, Pocket 3, Sector A5 to the petitioner; charges payable to be communicated within 2 weeks of the allotment and paid by the petitioner within 4 weeks thereafter; parties bound by their statements; petition disposed of. ¶¶20

Smt. Saroj @ Suraj Vs Delhi Development Authority and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus directing the respondents, particularly respondent No. 1 (DDA), to hold a draw of lots (regular or mini) and allot a plot to her as per her entitlement.

¶¶13

Court's answer

The respondents shall conduct a mini draw and allot the said land (70 sq mts at Village Narela, Pocket 3, Sector A5) to the petitioner within 2 weeks, and communicate the charges payable by the petitioner within 2 weeks thereafter.

¶¶19

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner shall pay the amount demanded by the respondents within 4 weeks after communication of the charges.

¶¶19

Key takeaways

The order is passed in the peculiar facts of this case and shall not be treated as a precedent.obiter¶¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Jasmeet Singh, J.) disposed of a writ petition under Article 226 filed by Smt. Saroj @ Suraj against the Delhi Development Authority seeking a mandamus to hold a draw of lots and allot a plot as per her entitlement. Following land acquisition and on the LAC's recommendation, respondent No. 1 agreed to offer a plot of 70 sq mts (83.71 sq yards) at Village Narela, Pocket 3, Sector A5. Counsel for the petitioner stated she was agreeable to the allotment and would pay the demands raised. The Court directed the respondents to conduct a mini draw and allot the land within 2 weeks, communicate the charges payable within 2 weeks thereafter, with payment by the petitioner within 4 weeks thereafter, and disposed of the petition binding the parties to their statements, clarifying that the order was passed in peculiar facts and would not be treated as a precedent.

¶1

$~20

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 9000/2019

¶4

SMT. SAROJ @ SURAJ .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Satish Dabas, Adv.

¶6

versus

¶7

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANR.

¶8

....Respondent Through: Ms. Shobhana Takiar, Standing Counsel with Mr. Shivam Takiar, Mr. Prateek Dhir, Mr. Kuljeet Singh, Advs.

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

¶10

¶11

O R D E R 19.01.2026

¶12

This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:

¶13

“It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Honble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ, order or directions in the nature of mandamus or any there appropriate writ, order or direction thereby directing the Respondents specially the Respondent no. 1 to hold the draw of lots, regular or mini, and allot a plot to the Petitioner as per her entitlement in the interest of justice….”

¶14

After acquisition and on the recommendation received from LAC, the

¶15

This is a digitally signed order.

¶16

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 22/01/2026 at 13:19:37

¶17

respondent No. 1 has agreed to offer a plot of land measuring 70 sq mts (equivalent to 83.71 sq yards) at Village Narela, Pocket 3, Sector A5.

¶18

Mr. Dabas, learned counsel appearing through video conferencing mode, for and on behalf of the petitioner, states that the petitioner is agreeable to the allotment and will pay all the demands raised by the respondents in this regard.

¶19

The respondents shall conduct a mini draw and shall allot the said land to the petitioner within 2 weeks from today, communicate the charges payable by the petitioner within 2 weeks thereafter and the petitioner shall pay the needful amount within 4 weeks thereafter.

¶20

Binding the parties to the statements made herein above, the petition is disposed of.

¶21

The order is being passed in peculiar facts of this case and will not be treated as a precedent.

¶22

JASMEET SINGH, J

¶23

JANUARY 19, 2026/sp

¶24

This is a digitally signed order.

¶25

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 22/01/2026 at 13:19:37

Smt. Saroj @ Suraj v. Delhi Development Authority and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Saroj @ Suraj v. Delhi Development Authority and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vivek Mukherji Vs Union of India & Anr.

Smt Prabhawati Shukla Vs Iifl Home Finance Ltd. & Ors.

Smt Geeta Devi Vs Iifl Home Finance Ltd. & Ors.

Kushagra Sharma and Ors. Vs Union of India & Anr.

Kashmiri Vs DDA and Ors.

Twinkle Chhabra Vs State Bank of India and Anr.

Ms. Dapinder Kaur and Anr. Vs Dav Public School and Ors.

Smt. Sneh Aggarwal Vs Punjab National Bank and Anr.

Somnath Bharti Vs Shri Satish Upadhyay

M/S Kalra Radios Vs S. Baljeet Singh

Shri Mannulal Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya Vs National Council for Teacher Education & Anr.

Supreme Cooperative Group Housing Society Ltd. and Anr. Vs D.D.A. and Anr.

Susheela Vs Delhi Development Authority & Ors.

Trishika Jaidka Vs Directorate of Education & Anr.