Allotment of Alternative Plots Subject to Prevailing Policy and Availability, Not a Vested Right

The land of the Respondent’s grandfather (Hari Ram) was acquired in 1959. In 1983 and 1984, the Delhi Administration recommended an alternative plot of 250 sq. yards for him under the 1961 Scheme

Hari Ram died in 1986. Subsequently, the DDA revised its policy, reducing the size of alternative plots to 40 sq. yards for cases where acquired land was under 1000 sq. yards

Disputes among legal heirs delayed the process from 1986 until 2015. In 1989, the DDA offered a 31.69 sq. meter plot, but no allotment letter was issued due to the heirs' failure to submit documents

In 2015, the Respondent (grandson) sought mutation, and the DDA substituted his name but restricted the allotment to 40 sq. yards per the 1986 policy. The learned Single Judge quashed this reduction, relying on Adarsh Sharma v. UOI, and directed the DDA to allot 250 sq. yards

1. Whether a person whose land is acquired for planned development has a vested right to the allotment of an alternative plot of a specific size based on a recommendation letter

2. Whether the challenge to the reduction of plot size was barred by delay and laches given the inaction from 1989 to 2015

The Court primarily applied the Full Bench decision in Ramanand v. Union of India, which established that an individual whose land is acquired has no absolute or vested right to allotment, but only a right to be considered in accordance with the prevailing scheme/policy

This principle was reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in Amolak Raj v. DDA, holding that allotment is subject to availability and the policy existing at the time of consideration

The Court also applied the principle of delay and laches, as established in State