Satyanand v. State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr

SANJEEV NARULA, J. AUGUST 14, 2023

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Date of Decision: 14.08.2023 % LPA 587/2023 and C.M. No. 41535/2023 SATYANAND ..... Appellant Through: Petitioner in person. versus STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Santosh Kumar Tripathi, Standing Counsel with Mr. Pradyumn Rao, Advocate for Respondent/ GNCTD. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ. (ORAL) 1. The present LPA has been preferred by the appellant against judgement dated 03.07.2023 passed by the Learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 1572/2017 titled Satyanand vs. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr. wherein the Learned Single Judge has dismissed the underlying writ petition on the ground that it raised disputed question of facts which cannot be determined in writ proceedings. 2. The Appellant herein had filed W.P.(C) No. 1572/2017 claiming that the Appellant/Petitioner was a landless person and therefore was allotted a plot by the Government of NCT of Delhi (GNCTD)/Respondent No. 1 in terms of a policy framed by it. He claims that he was allotted a plot bearing No. 309, Panchayati Colony, Village Haiderpur, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "subject property") by Respondent No.1, however the possession of the same has been given by GNCTD to another person. He therefore filed the underlying writ petition praying for a direction that the Respondents remove the possession of the plot grabber from the plot in question and that the Appellant/Petitioner be paid compensation from the date of allotment till possession of the plot in question or until some other alternate plot is given to the Appellant/Petitioner. 3. The facts of the case reveal that the Appellant has earlier filed a suit being Civil Suit No. 215/1991, re-numbered as Suit No. 875/1993 titled Satyanand v. Jagdish Singh wherein the Appellant had claimed allotment of Plot No. 228-A, Ambedkar Nagar (Panchayati Colony), Haiderpur, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "Ambedkar Nagar Plot") by the Delhi Administration under its 20 Point Programme for allotment of land to poor people and the said suit was decided against the Appellant on 17.11.1994. The Trial Court in its judgment observed that as the Appellant had admitted that he was allotted a plot in Mangolpuri, he could not have been allotted another plot under the same policy in Haiderpur. The Appellant preferred an appeal against the aforesaid decision which was dismissed on 23.08.1997. He thereafter preferred a second appeal being RSA No. 03/1998 before this Court, which was also dismissed on 01.10.2010. While dismissing the second appeal, this Court had categorically held that there was no document on record to substantiate the claim of the Appellant that he was allotted the Ambedkar Nagar Plot. It is undisputed that the Appellant had not disclosed any information regarding these proceedings in the underlying writ petition. 4. The Appellant had also filed another writ petition earlier before this Court, being W.P.(C) No. 6088/2001, in which he claimed ownership of the subject property. In the said writ petition, the petitioner had prayed for a direction to the Respondent to provide certified copies of documents including Allotment Register, Resolution Register, Sanctioned Plan and Account Records in respect of allotment of plots in Panchayati Colony, Haiderpur, Delhi – 110042. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 25.08.2010 with a direction to the Respondents-therein to provide certified copies of the requisite documents to the Appellant as the Respondents had acknowledged that as per Resolution dated 22.04.1976, one Satyanand was allotted the subject property and had deposited a sum of Rs. 45/- towards a plot admeasuring 100 sq. yds. 5. Subsequently, the Appellant had also filed a Contempt Petition before this Court being Cont. Cas. (C) No. 705/2010, in which he again claimed ownership of the subject property. The Contempt Case was disposed of vide order dated 12.