Tribunal remits Malete plots allocation case for re-hearing

Mpho Mokwape | Wednesday July 29, 2015 16:34

Of the 75 applicants who had lodged a court case seeking redress following the rejection of their applications for residential plots, 34 appeared before the Tribunal bench consisting of Sampa Kaisara, Kebalepile Rutherford and Gomolemo Tobetsa.

The Tribunal president Kaisara yesterday remitted the cases of all the applicants saying the Board should have made a provision to hear and address the aggrieved applicants before directing them to the Tribunal.

“The Board should give all applicants a hearing in terms of their individual rejections before any other complaints are lodged with the tribunal,” he said.

This transpired after the chairperson of the board, Roy Letsatsi admitted to the court that most of the applicants were never accorded a hearing after being rejected for plots despite many having requested a hearing.

In his defence, Letsatsi said out of the 385 plots that were advertised in 2013, 22,957 people applied for consideration, therefore it was impossible to accord everyone a hearing as to why they were rejected.

“The applicants were told in the rejection letters why they were rejected and we felt it was reason enough.

“Applicants were also informed before the application process that anyone with an existing plot elsewhere would not be considered regardless of the mode of acquisition,” he said. Letsatsi however conceded that it was an error on their part to assume that all understood what was required of them therefore agreeing that all aggrieved would be accorded a hearing in due course.

He further explained and requested the bench to emphasise to the applicants that it does not necessarily mean they would be allocated plots, but would just be heard on their grievances.

Earlier on, the 34 applicants who individually represented themselves complained of the same issue, that they were never briefed about the criteria that was to be used during consideration.

Most of the applicants referred to their rejection letters, that had a similar explanation of the applicants not giving descriptive answers and others having submitted incomplete forms.

One of the applicants, Thatayaone Lebatlamang told court that he was surprised when he was told that he was not considered because he did not give descriptive answers.

“The rejection letter indicated that I did not give descriptive answers. It is just not clear because when we submitted our forms, they were checked and we were individually told whether they were okay or not,” he said.

He argued that the Land Board, during the re-hearing should be able to explain in detail to them what they necessarily wanted in the application forms and also give them the criteria that was used for the allocation of the plots.