Delhi High Court
Banke Singh And Raj Kumar Sodhi vs Delhi Development Authority on 17 April, 2001
Equivalent citations: 2001VAD(DELHI)935, 92(2001)DLT362
Author: Manmohan Sarin
Bench: Manmohan Sarin
ORDER
Manmohan Sarin, J (Oral) Rule.
1. With the consent of the parties writ petitions are taken up for disposal.
By this composite Order I would be disposing of writ petitions bearing CW Nos. 4424/2000, 924/2001 and 6591/2000, as common question of fact and law are involved.
2. Petitioners in these cases were the applicants for allotment of MIG flats under the new Pattern Registration Scheme 1979 of the DDA. The undisputed facts are that the petitioners had duly paid the initial deposit as required under the scheme and were issued registration certificates. Thereafter the petitioners were also issued demand-cum-allotment letters intimating that MIG flats at the specified colony had been allotted. The petitioners benafide believed that with the receipt of the allotment letter their quest for shelter and housing was over. Petitioners later on discovered to their chargin that it was a case of double and wrong allotment in CW Nos 4424/2000 and 6591/2000. While in CW No. 924/2001, it was case of wrong allotment. Wrong allotment here refers to the flat being allotted in LIG Category, while the application was for a MIG flat. Double allotment of course signifies the said flat having been allotted to some one else also.
3. Counsel for the petitioner has urged before me that the petitioners had duly complied with their obligations under the scheme and they could not be faulted with if the DDA either made a wrong allotment or on account of malpractice it turned out to be a case of double allotment. In fact DDA itself has evolved a policy for dealing with cases of double allotment and wrong allotment. The earlier resolution No. 103/93 and resolution No. 144/93 dated 16.11.1993 embody the policy of dealing with cases of double allotment. It is not necessary to dwell on the policy embodied in these resolutions. It is sufficient to notice that as per the policy, the DDA is to allot the flats at the old/original cost. In fact it is also required to pay interest on the registration amount.
4. It may also be noticed that Resolution No. 144/93 was passed pursuant to the decision of this court in Suraj Bhan Chaudhary Vs. DDA CW No. 3827/92. In these circumstances, learned counsel for the respondents very fairly states that he has instructions to state that the respondents would also allot flats at the old cost. As regards interest on the deposited amount, rather petitioners had approached the court belatedly. Learned counsel for the petitioner, in these circumstances does not press the claim for interest on the registration amount. Respondent shall take steps to allot the flats in Peeragarhi as proposed. The requisite formalities including the issuances of demand-cum-allotment letter for the flats to be allotted, if not done already, shall be completed and possession be handed over the petitioners within a period of 2 months from today.
5. Writ petitions stand disposed of.