Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

march 2026

Delhi High Court · 2026-03-30

KAMLESH vs DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Citation / case number
LPA-175/2026 2026:DHC:2800-DB
Court
Delhi High Court
Petitioner
KAMLESH
Respondent
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Judgment text excerpt

$~59 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 30.03.2026 + LPA 175/2026, CM APPL. 19900/2026 & CM APPL. 19901/2026 KAMLESH .....Appellant Through: Mr. S.C. Singhal& Mr. Parth Mahajan, Advocates (through VC). Versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY .....Respondent Through: Ms. Shobhana Takiar- Standing Counsel along with Mr. Kuljeet Singh & Mr. Razia, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA TEJAS KARIA, J. (ORAL) 1. The present Letters Patent Appeal is filed against the Order dated 04.02.2026 (“Impugned Order”) in W.P. (C) 3176/2021 (“Writ Petition”), whereby the Writ Petition filed by the Appellant seeking allotment of the plot by the Respondent was dismissed. 2. It is the case of the Appellant that the Appellant is the widow of Late Shri Sadhu Singh, who had applied for allotment of a plot of land in the year 1983 by the Respondent under EWS category. Late Shri Sadhu Singh passed away on 29.06.1996. After his death, the Appellant migrated to UK in the year 2000. 3. The Appellant has contended that the Appellant became aware of the allotment of Plot No. 1219 in Sector-34, Pocket C-6, Rohini (“Plot”) by the Respondent in favour of Late Shri Sandhu Singh in August 2019, when she was contacted by local property dealer enquiring for purchasing the Plot. LPA 175/2026 Page 1 of 5 Signature Not Verified Signed By:NEELAM SHARMA Signing Date:06.04.2026 17:33:52 Accordingly, the Appellant sent a letter dated 02.09.2019 to the Respondent under Right to Information Act, 2005. Subsequently, the Appellant sent a Legal Notice dated 04.09.2019. As no response was received from the Respondent, the Appellant filed the Writ Petition on 10.06.2020. 4. During the pendency of the Writ Petition, the Respondent informed that the draw of lots fo

KAMLESH vs DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY · Niyam