Delhi High Court
Anjuman Co-Operative Group ... vs Delhi Development Authority on 24 January, 2003
Equivalent citations: 2003 IVAD Delhi 83, 106 (2003) DLT 725
Author: S K Kaul
Bench: S K Kaul
JUDGMENT
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.
1. Rule.
2. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal.
3. The petitioner society applied for allotment of land to the respondent, i.e., Delhi Development Authority (DDA) and in terms of letter dated 12.11.1999, it was proposed to allot a plot of land measuring 7000 sq. mtrs. in Dwarka Phase-I and II Residential Scheme to the petitioner taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner society consisted of 120 members. The strength of the members of the petitioner society was communicated by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies, New Delhi vide letter dated 9.8.1999 and the provisional rate of Rs. 4,063/- per sq. mtr. was communicated to the petitioner vide the said letter. The petitioner was aggrieved by the rate being charged from the petitioner society in view of the fact that 57 other societies were sought to be charged @ Rs. 3,533/- per sq. mtr., who were to be issued allotment in the same draw of lots and were so issued the allotment letters. As an illustration of the same, the petitioner society has filed the allotment letter in respect of another society dated 5.4.2000 of Himachali CGHS Ltd. Society where an application was made on 16.7.1998. The petitioner society made representations dated 7.4.2000 and 1.5.2000, but to no avail. The petitioner society was issued an allotment letter dated 3.5.2000 @ Rs. 4,063/- per sq. mtr. taking into consideration the application of the petitioner dated 24.12.1999.
4. The petitioner society made a representation to the permanent Lok Adalat of the respondent dated 11.5.2000 and also further addressed a communication to the DDA dated 5.6,2000. It is relevant to note that the DDA addressed a letter dated 17.5.1999 to the respondent stating that though vide letter dated 31.8.1992 of the Registrar of Co-operative Society, a communication was received by the respondent to collect a copy of the approved final list, the same did not recommend the case for allotment of land to the petitioner. It is further stated in the said letter that the consolidated list was sent to the office of the DDA by the Registrar of Co-operative Society on 16.12.1993 stating 'List not yet approved".
It was in these circumstances that no action for allotment of land to the petitioner society took place till the clearance was received from the Registrar of Co-operative Society. The petitioner society has filed the letter dated 31.8,1992 of the Registrar of Co-operative Society as also a letter dated 9.8.1999. The letter dated 9.8.1999 addressed to the DDA states that the list of 120 members of the petitioner society was approved by the office vide letter dated 31.8.1993. However, inadvertently in the letter dated 16.12.1993, it was mentioned "List of not yet approved".
5. The decision was given by the permanent Lok Adalat on 18.8.2000 noting the aforesaid facts and stating that in view of the admitted mistake of the Registrar of Co-operative Society, the petitioner was not held eligible for allotment for an earlier date while in fact in 1993 itself, the petitioner society was so eligible.
6. It was, however, noted that taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances, it would be appropriate if the petitioner is charged @ Rs. 3,533/- per sq. mtr. as charged from 57 other societies, who were allotted land in the same draw of lots as the petitioner.
7. In the counter affidavit, the only defense taken is that the land rates are predetermined based on prevailing rates on the date of offer. It is admitted that some of the societies were offered land @ Rs. 3,533/- per sq. mtr., but this was so since the said societies were made an offer on 3.6.1998 unlike the petitioner society, which was offered land only on 12.11.1999. Admittedly, this delay has occurred on account of the confusion about the approval of the list of members of the petitioner society.
8. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner cannot be made to suffer on account of the fault of the communication between the Registrar, Co-operative Society and the respondent DDA.
9. Learned Counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that there was no question of allotment of land prior to the draw held where 57 other societies were allotted land and in case the petitioner society would have been offered land at an earlier date in 1998, the same rates would have been charged from the petitioner.
10. I have considered the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the parties. The aforesaid facts show that the only reason for non-consideration of the case of the petitioner and for making an offer of allotment to the petitioner at an earlier date arises from the fact that while the petitioner's case and of its members was cleared as far back in the year 1992, the communication of the Registrar, Cooperative Society dated 16.12.1993 created a confusion, since it was inadvertently mentioned that the list has not been approved. The letter dated 9.8.1999 of the said Registrar states that the communication dated 31.8.1993 did communicate to the respondent that the list had been approved, but the mistake had occurred in the subsequent communication dated 16.12.1993. If that date is taken, the petitioner would have been made an offer of allotment at an earlier date and not in 1999 by the respondent.
11. The petitioner cannot be faulted on this account and made to suffer as a consequence thereto. It is also relevant to note that other societies have been allotted land at the rate of Rs. 3,533/- sq. mtr. and the petitioner is sought to be discriminated against only on account of the fact that the offer has been made to it later, which is a direct result of the aforesaid confusion. The permanent Lok Adalat in its order had considered these aspects and rightly come to the conclusion in terms of the order dated 18.8.2000 that the petitioner should be offered land at Rs. 3,533/- per sq. mtr. It is unfortunate that this fair solution of the dispute has not been accepted by the petitioner DDA compelling the petitioner to file the present petition,
12. A writ of mandamus is issued thereby quashing the demand made against the petitioner in terms of the demand-cum-allotment letter dated 3.5.2000 charging the petitioner @ Rs. 4,063/- per sq. mtr. and it is further directed that the petitioner should be issued a fresh demand letter charging for the land @ Rs. 3,533/- per sq. mtr.
13. Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has already deposited the amount @ Rs. 4,063/- per sq. mtr. in order to obtain possession of the said land and to construct on the said land. Direction is, thus, issued to the respondent to refund excess amount paid by the petitioner within a period of 6 weeks from today along with simple interest @ 12% per annum from the date of deposit of excess amount till the date of refund.
14. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions. The petitioner society shall also be entitled to costs of Rs. 5,000/-.
