Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
64.
W.P.(C^ 12503/2018 CRESCENT ENGINEERING CORPORATION Petitioner
Through: Mr M. K. Vasisht and Mr Piyush, Advocates.
Through: Mr Mayank Bamniyal, Advocate for GNCTD.
Ms Nikita Salwan, Advocate for DSIIDC.
Mr. Dhanesh Relan, Standing Counsel, DDA with Ms Komal
Sarout, Advocate.
85.
MAHAJAN PACKERS Petitioner
Through: Mr M. K. Vashisht and Mr Piyush,
Through: . Ms Nikita Salwan, Advocate for DSIIDC.
Mr Dhanesh Relan, Standing
87.
DAL CHAND SAGAR Petitioner
Through: Ms Nikita Salwan, Advocate for DSIIDC.
AMITVASHISHT Petitioner
P. N. BHALLA
Through:
<
•n
88.
89.
90.
, Sarout, Advocate.
VIRENDER KUMAR
Through:
Petitioner Mr M. K. Vasisht and Mr Piyush, -J c
MAHESH CHAND GUPTA Petitioner
DSIIDC.
^ + W.P.(012610/2018 DAL CHAND SAGAR Petitioner f Through: Mr M. K. Vasisht and Mr Piyush,
AND
$-96 ^ < ;
W.P.(a 12614/2018 GYAN PRAKASH ..... Petitioner
Through; Mr M. K. Vasisht and Mr Piyush,
Ms Nikita Salwan, Advocate for DSIIDC.
26.11.2018
ORDER
1. The petitioners in the above petitions are the allottees of industrial sheds / flats allotted by the Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (hereafter 'DSIIDC') or have otherwise acquired interests in such sheds. The petitioners are desirous that the industrial sheds purchased by them be converted from leasehold to freehold. The petitioners also claim that they have deposited the conversion charges with the DSIIDC for the said purpose.
2. They have filed the present petitions, essentially, being aggrieved by inaction on the part of the DSIIDC in converting the aforesaid properties from leasehold to freehold.
3. One of the principal reasons for inaction in conversion of the properties from leasehold to freehold is the impasse between DSIIDC and the Delhi Development Authority (hereafter 'the DDA'). It is the case ofthe j DDA that although the structure may belong to the DSIIDC but the land in question belongs to the DDA and, therefore, the DDA is entitled to the conversion charges and not the DSIIDC. It is seen that a similar issue is also involved in the case of Shikha Gugnani &Anr. v. Govt. ofNCT & Ors: WP(C) No.9772/2015.
4. By the order dated 08.05.2018 passed in Shikha Gugnani's case, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had found a workable solution. The relevant extract ofthe said order is as under:
7. This is, especially so, as I am informed by Mr. Dhawan that the conversion charges were deposited as far back as in July, 2013. As indicated above, Ms. Arora does not dispute this fact. She saysthat there couldbe some additional charges that may have to be paid by the petitioners.
8. Having regard to the aforesaid, DSIIDC is directed to convert the subject property from leasehold to freehold.
9. A conveyance deed will be executed in favour of the petitioners. In case, additional charges have to be paid, the "petitioners will deposit the same upon DSIIDC giving them due intimation. Furthermore, if any other formalities are required to be fiilfilled, the petitioners will also comply with the same.
10. The needful will be done by DSIIDC within eight weeks from today. ) — V )
11. Insofar as the conversion charges received from the petitioners are concerned, they will be deposited in a no-lien interest bearing Account by DSIIDC. As to which entity will finally enjoy the benefit of the same, shall be determined uponfinal adjudication of the writpetition."
5. This Court is ofthe view that it would be apposite to follow the said procedure in these matters as well. Accordingly, DSIIDC is directed to convert the said properties from leasehold to freehold provided the petitioners deposit the necessary conversion charges with the DSIIDC and otherwise comply with all other requirements. The issue whether the DDA orDSIIDC is entitled to appropriate the conversion charges, would not hold up the applications filed by the petitioners for conversion of the properties allotted to them, from leasehold to freehold. All charges received by the DSIIDC for converting the properties in question shall be deposited in a nolien interest bearing account.
6. It is clarified that nothing stated herein should be construed as an expression of opinion that the petitioners are otherwise entitled to conversion ofthe respective properties purchased by them.
7. The issue as to whether the DDA or DSIIDC would be entitled to the same shall abide by the decision of this Court in Shikha Gugnani {supra), which this Court is inforaied is pending before the Co-ordinate Bench ofthis Court.
8. It is further directed that in the event the petitioners are not eligible or have not complied with the requirement under the conversion policy, DSIIDC shall communicate the same to the petitioners within eight weeks from today. $
9. The present petitions are disposed of in the above terms. All the pending appHcations, if any, are also disposed of
10. Order dasti under the signatures ofthe Court Master.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J NOVEMBER 26, 2018 MK