Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: DDA flat allotment in M.S. Tewari vs Delhi Development Authority on 11 May, 2016Matching Fragments
2. The case has a chequered history. Therefore, in order to appreciate the controversy involved in the matter, it would be necessary to notice a few material facts. These are:
2.1 On 18.10.1979, vide his Application No. 36056, the Complainant had got himself registered with the Delhi Development Authority (for short "the DDA") for allotment of a flat under the 'New Pattern Scheme, 1979'. He deposited the registration amount of ₹4500/-. His Priority Number was 32919. After 23 years of registration, on 31.05.2002 the draw of lots for allotment of Middle Income Group (MIG) flats was held by the DDA for the applicants with Priority Nos. 32416 to 34055. The Complainant found that his Priority Number was not included in the draw held, as neither his name nor priority number figured in the result list for the said draw. Responding to his representations dated 13.06.2002 and 04.07.2002, the DDA included his name in the next draw held on 05.07.2002, and allotted an MIG flat, bearing No. 74, Pocket-E, Sector-17, Dwarka, Phase-II, vide Demand-cum-Allotment letter dated 01.08.2002/ 09.08.2002, on cash down payment of ₹8,80,232/-. Since, according to the Complainant, even the basic amenities were missing in Pocket-E; the flat allotted had locational disadvantages and above all, the draw was not meant for the Registrants in his category, vide his letters dated 22.08.2002 and 05.09.2002, he requested the DDA to include his name in the next draw for allotment of another flat, in the category he was entitled to. The request was rejected by the DDA and the same was intimated by it to the Complainant, vide DDA's letters dated 07.01.2003 and 10.02.2003. After protracted correspondence between the parties, on 19.11.2004, the DDA cancelled the allotment of the flat allotted to the Complainant.
5. Dissatisfied with the order of the District Forum, both the parties preferred Appeals before the State Commission. Appeal No. 394 of 2006 was preferred by the Complainant for grant of further relief in the form of a direction to the DDA to allot an MIG flat and Appeal No. 699 of 2006 was preferred by the DDA against award of compensation in favour of the Complainant.
6. The State Commission, vide its order dated 26.07.2006, while disposing of the Appeal, preferred by the Complainant, inter alia, observed that the DDA had allotted a flat to the Complainant in the draw held on 05.07.2002 but the Complainant did not make any payment pursuant to the Demand-cum-Allotment letter and as a consequence the allotment was cancelled; the insistence of the Complainant for being allotted a flat in the same locality where others were allotted was unjustified and uncalled for; and for the inadvertent negligence of the DDA, the District Forum had adequately awarded compensation of ₹1,00,000/-. However, since the registration money of ₹4,500/- was still lying with the DDA and District Forum had directed the DDA to refund it, the State Commission directed that the DDA may consider the allotment of any other flat as per rules, out of the already allotted flats, which may be lying vacant, or any other flat and if it is not possible then they will include the name of the Complainant in the first draw to be held in future for the registrants in the waiting list. As a consequence thereof, the State Commission, vide its order dated 11.07.2008 dismissed the Appeal, preferred by the DDA.
8. Since the final order dated 26.07.2006 was not complied with by the DDA, despite representations, the Complainant was left with no option but to file an Execution application against the DDA under Sections 25 and 27 of the Act, before the District Forum, being Execution Application No. 286 of 2010.
9. During the pendency of the Execution Application, vide its letter dated 14.07.2010, DDA allotted flat No. 84, Sector-12, Pocket-2, Dwarka, New Delhi to the Complainant and issued a Demand-cum-Allotment letter bearing No. 77626 dated 13.07.10 - 19.07.10 at the current price of ₹31,52,916/-. The said Demand-cum-Allotment letter was received by the Complainant on 15.07.2010. As the flat was allotted at the current price, vide his letter dated 26.08.2010, the Complainant objected to the same and requested for limiting its cost to ₹8,80,232.70, as was demanded vide demand letter No. 18505 dated 01.08.2002 - 09.08.2002, when the second allotment was made.
16. In the light of the afore-stated factual scenario, I am constrained to observe that the DDA has not treated the Complainant properly and his case has not been considered in its correct perspective. It is not in dispute that order dated 26.07.2006, inter-alia, directing the DDA to consider the case of the Complainant for allotment of a flat in the future draw of lots, had attained finality. As a matter of fact, in deference to the said order, during the pendency of execution proceedings before the District Forum, the DDA allotted the flat in question to the Complainant, vide its letter dated 14.07.2010 at the current price of ₹31,52,916/-. As according to the Complainant there was serious lapse on the part of the DDA in not including his name in the draw of lots held as far back as on 31.05.2002, he was entitled to a flat at a price, which was charged from other registrants under the scheme, who were much lower to him in seniority as per the priority number. In short, his stand was that the subject flat should have been allotted to him at a price of a similar flat in the year 2002, which at the highest was ₹8,80,232/-, when another flat was offered to him pursuant to the draw of lots held on 05.07.2002. Since his stand did not find favour with both the Fora below, he filed this Petition, in which, the aforenoted interim orders, directing maintenance of status quo in respect of its possession came to be made.