Alternative plot claim denied where prolonged inaction and unexplained delay amounted to waiver of the rehabilitation benefit.

The right to an alternative plot under an acquisition scheme was treated as a rehabilitative benefit rather than an absolute vested entitlement. A claimant had to apply within a reasonable time and explain any delay. Because the original owner never applied within the prescribed period, the later claim was made after a long lapse, and the appellants had not asserted any independent claim earlier, the prolonged inaction was treated as waiver of the claim and a valid basis to refuse discretionary allotment. The claim for alternative allotment was rejected and no relief was granted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants were entitled to claim an alternative plot despite gross and unexplained delay in asserting the claim.

Analysis: The right to an alternative plot under the acquisition scheme was treated as a measure of rehabilitation and not as an absolute vested right. A claimant was required to approach the authority within a reasonable time and explain any delay. Here, the original owner never applied within the prescribed period, the later claim was made after a long lapse of time, and the appellants themselves had not asserted any independent claim earlier. In these circumstances, the prolonged inaction was treated as a waiver of the claim and as a valid ground to decline discretionary allotment.

Conclusion: The claim for alternative allotment was rejected and the appellants were not entitled to relief.

---