Full Text
W.P.(C)11778/2018
CM PRAKASH SHARMA Petitioner
Through; MrPramod Kumar Ahuja,Advocate.
Through: Mr AmishDabar,Advocate for R-1.
Ms Anusuya Salwan and Ms Nikita Salwan,Advocate for R-2.
Through: Mr Mansoor Ansari,Advocate.
Through: Ms Anusuya Salwan and Ms Nikita Salwan,Advocatesfor DSIIDC.
Mr A. K. Pandey and Mr Vikas Kumar Sharma, Advocates for R-1 and R-2.
Mr Anil Dabas,Advocate for R-4.
SHRI SUNIL NISCHAL Petitioner
Through: MrPramod Kumar Ahuja,Advocate.
2018:DHC:8828
Through:
AMIR AHMED & ANR
Through:
Respondents Kumar Sharma,Advocates for R-1.
Through: MrPramod Kumar Ahuja,Advocate.
Through: Ms Tara Narula, Advocate for R- 1/GNCTD.
-•Ml
AND
SH.PURAN CHAND KATHURIA Petitioner
Through: Mr Manspor Ansari,Advocate.
Kumar Sharma, Advocates for R-1 and R-2.
31.10.2018
ORDER
1. The petitioners in the above petitions are the allottees of industrial sheds/flats by the Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (hereafter 'DSIIDC'). The petitioners are desirous that the industrial sheds allotted to them be converted from leasehold to freehold. The petitioners also claim that they have deposited the conversion charges with the DSIIDC forthe 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 impasse between DSIIDC and the Delhi Development Authority (hereafter 'the DDA'). It is the case of the DDA that although,the structure may belong to the DSIIDC butthe 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 the similar issue is also involved in the case ofShikha 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 under: "6.Having heard learned counsel for the parties,I am ofthe view that while the adjudication ofthe issue as to who should retain the charges which have deposited by the petitioner for the purposes ofconversion can be decided at a later date,the petitioners in the meanwhile should not be put to trouble by delaying the conversion of the subject property from leasehold to freehold.
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 saysthatthere could besome additional charges that may have to be paid bythe petitioners.
8. Having regard to the aforesaid, DSIIDC is directed to convertthe subject propertyfrom 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 fulfilled,the petitioners will also comply with > the same.
10. The needful will be done by DSIIDC within eight weeks jfrom today.
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 upon final adjudication ofthe 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 or DSIIDC is entitled to appropriate the conversion charges,would not hold up the applications filed by the petitioners for conversion ofthe properties allotted to them, from leasehold to freehold. All charges received by the DSIIDC for converting the propertiesTn 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 allotted to them.
7. The issue as to whether the DDA or DSIIDC would be entitled to the same shall abide by the decision ofthis Court in Shikha Gugnani{supra), which this Courtis informed is pending before the Co-ordinate Bench ofthis Court.
8. It is further directed thatin 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 two weeks jfrom today.
9. The present petitions are disposed of in the above terms. All the pending applications,ifany,are also disposed of.
10. Order underthe signatures ofthe CourtMaster. VIBHUBAKHRU,J OCTOBER 31,2018 MK