Full Text
Translation output
V
$-15 HIGH COURT OF DELHI W.P.(C) 5055/201 DIPESH JAIN Petitioner
Through: Mr.I.S. Dahiya, Advocate.
$-15 HIGH COURT OF DELHI W.P.(C) 5055/201 DIPESH JAIN Petitioner
Through: Mr.I.S. Dahiya, Advocate.
VERSUS
GOVTOF NCT OFDELHI Respondent
Through: MsJyoti Tyagi & Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Advocates.
Through: MsJyoti Tyagi & Mr.Yeeshu Jain, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI
09.01.2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is aggrieved by the actionof the respondent in givinghim a smallerplot by way of alternate allotment in lieu of acquisition of his agricultural land even though as per the scheme of the respondents, he was entitled to a much bigger plot. He submits that the petitioner has made representations to the respondent seeking redressal of his grievance, but has received no reply thereto.
The learned counsel further submits that at this stage, he confines his relief to issuance of directions to the respondent to consider his grievance pointed out in his representation. Learned counsel, however, submits that the representation which was submitted on 10.04.2017 was not exhaustive and did not contain all the grounds which the petitioner wanted to urge. He therefore, prays
2018:DHC:8778 that the respondent be directed to treat the present writ petition as a representation.
In the facts of the case, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondent to treat the present petition as a representation and pass a speaking order within eight weeks by dealing with the contentionsraised in the petition. Needless to say that if the petitioner is still aggrieved, he can take legal recourse in accordance with law.
JANUARY 09, 2018 gm PALLI, J 2018:DHC:8778
09.01.2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is aggrieved by the actionof the respondent in givinghim a smallerplot by way of alternate allotment in lieu of acquisition of his agricultural land even though as per the scheme of the respondents, he was entitled to a much bigger plot. He submits that the petitioner has made representations to the respondent seeking redressal of his grievance, but has received no reply thereto.
The learned counsel further submits that at this stage, he confines his relief to issuance of directions to the respondent to consider his grievance pointed out in his representation. Learned counsel, however, submits that the representation which was submitted on 10.04.2017 was not exhaustive and did not contain all the grounds which the petitioner wanted to urge. He therefore, prays
2018:DHC:8778 that the respondent be directed to treat the present writ petition as a representation.
In the facts of the case, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing the respondent to treat the present petition as a representation and pass a speaking order within eight weeks by dealing with the contentionsraised in the petition. Needless to say that if the petitioner is still aggrieved, he can take legal recourse in accordance with law.
JANUARY 09, 2018 gm PALLI, J 2018:DHC:8778
JUDGMENT