Shopowner Can't Seek Rehabilitation On Acquisition Of Land By DMRC Unless He Does Business From There: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that Delhi Metro's 'Relocation and Rehabilitation policy in respect of project affected persons' does not contemplate rehabilitation for shopowners whose shops are acquired for a project, unless they are 'doing business' from the said shop.“In order to avail benefit of being awarded an alternate shop under the aforesaid policy/guideline, the petitioner had to establish that he was doing business from the said shop. The petitioner on account of being owner of the said shop does not acquire any right of alternate shop in terms of the aforesaid policy/guideline,” said Justice Amit Sharma.The bench was dealing with the plea moved by the owner of a land acquired by the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) for the Mass Rapid Transit System project.Petitioner claimed to have been running a Tourist office from the said shop and thus sought allotment of alternative plot in terms of the DMRC policy.DMRC had rejected his request, stating that the shop was reflected to be closed in both survey and valuation report of PWD. It claimed that the Relocation and Rehabilitation Policy entitles only the Project Affected Shopkeepers, “doing business”.Before the High Court, the Petitioner claimed that his shop was closed at time of survey as he could not open the same due to family problems.DMRC however presented electricity bills of the shops showing consumption of worth ₹40-90 only, suggesting that the shop was not used for any business.Petitioner argued that the only requirement as per the aforesaid policy is that he is the owner of the shop.Finding this argument to be “misplaced”, the High Court said,“If the object of the aforesaid policy was to allot an alternate shop to the owner, irrespective of whether a business is being carried out from the said shop or not, then the whole exercise of survey of the shops and residences becomes irrelevant.”It noted that the policy does not even discriminate between shop owners and tenants for the purpose of rehabilitation, so far as the persons are “doing business”.The Court also emphasized that the same parameter has been adopted for rehabilitation of persons who were actually residing at the premises.As such, Petitioner's plea for rehabilitation was dismissed.Appearance: Mr. L.B. Rai, Mr. Vineesh Tyagi and Mr. Satvik Rai, Advocates for Petitioner; Mr. Abhinav Singh, Mr. Anant Kumar Jain, Ms. Neeshu and Mr. Amit Madhwal, Advocates for GNCTD. Mr. Tarun Johri and Mr. Vishwajeet Tyagi, Advocates for R-2/DMRC. Mr. Sunil Kumar Jha and Mr. M.S. Akhtar, Advocates for R-3/L&B.Case title: Surender Kumar v. GNCTDCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1218Case no.: W.P.(C) 2137/2015Click here to read order

Shopowner Can't Seek Rehabilitation On Acquisition Of Land By DMRC Unless He Does Business From There: Delhi High Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Shopowner Can't Seek Rehabilitation On Acquisition Of Land By DMRC Unless He Does Business From There: Delhi High Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers