High court smells plot ‘scam’ | delhi | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Feb 22, 2017-Wednesday
-°C
New Delhi
  • Humidity
    -
  • Wind
    -

High court smells plot ‘scam’

delhi Updated: Dec 12, 2009 00:43 IST
Harish V. Nair
Harish V. Nair
Hindustan Times
Delhi High Court

Delhi High Court has smelt a ‘scam’ in the process of allocation of alternative plots to those whose property has been acquired for the planned development of the Capital.

On Friday, the court ordered a probe into a case where one JP Goel, ineligible for a residential plot was granted one while it was denied to identically placed two other applicants who had jointly bought a property with him and which was later acquired.

The court concluded that all three were not entitled for alternative plot as they had bought the land after the acquisition notification in 1966.

Dismissing the alternative land plea of one Nirmal Gupta, joint “owner” of the land with Goel, a Bench of Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice Suresh Kait said: “This is not curtains down. Directions need to be issued to unearth the scam which is rampantly rearing its head and flourishing in the corridors of power… this case shows how bureaucrats misuse process of law to fatten their coffers”.

On November 13, 1972, Gupta along with one Kanwar Sain and Goel jointly bought a property in Sarai Peepal Thala which was under acquisition as per a 1966 notification.

Delhi’s land department awarded them compensation and also allotted alternative land. But after it realised that the recommendation for alternative plot was against the rules, it was withdrawn.

Sain and Goel then approached Delhi High Court. A single judge, recognising them as owners of the land on the ground that they received compensation ruled they were entitled to a plot.

Gupta’s counsel R.K. Saini, who brought to fore the ‘scam’ told the Bench the land department mysteriously filed an appeal against the single judge’s order only in the Sain’s case and not Goel’s. The court then asked the department to identify the official who filed this “selective” appeal and why the order in favour of Goel wasn’t challenged.

Tata Tea’s Anthem of apathy
Partnered feature