Rajneesh Bhola vs Delhi Development Authority
2009 Latest Caselaw 1632 Del

22
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+    W.P.(C) 2255/2008

     RAJNEESH BHOLA                   ..... Petitioner
                  Through Mr.D.K. Bhardwaj, advocate with
                  petitioner in person.

                    versus

     D.D.A.                    ..... Respondent
                         Through Ms.Manisha Tyagi, advocate for DDA.

     CORAM:
     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA

                   ORDER

% 24.04.2009

1. Petitioner, Mr. Rajneesh Bhola was registered under the NPR

Scheme, 1979 for allotment of an LIG flat. He had deposited

Rs.1500/- towards registration fee in 1979.

2. After waiting for more than 25 years, the petitioner was allotted

a LIG flat at Dwarka in the draw of lots held in 2006. The petitioner

claims that he did not receive demand cum allotment letter but came

to know about the said allotment from a property dealer in Nasirpur,

Dwarka and thereupon he visited the office of DDA. He informed DDA

vide his letter dated 24th November, 2006 that he had changed his

residence from Bara Hindu Rao to Rohini and future correspondence

and demand-cum-allotment letter should be issued to him at his new WPC NO.2255/2008 Page 1 address.

3. DDA in their counter affidavit has stated that they had issued

demand cum allotment letter in the name of the petitioner on 25th

August, 2006 at Bara Hindu Rao address and the last date for making

payment of initial deposit with interest was 21st February, 2007. As

the flat had been allotted on hire purchase, the petitioner was

required to make payment of the balance amount in 144 monthly

installments @ Rs.6730/- p.m. starting from 10th November, 2006.

The stand taken by the DDA is that on 17th October, 2006 they had

received a request letter from the petitioner for refund of the

registration money along with the original demand cum allotment

letter, three specimen signatures with one photo attested by notary

public, fourth copy of bank challan form of Rs.1,500/- and original

FDR of 1979, copy of bank passbook, etc. Accordingly, DDA cancelled

the registration of the petitioner, instead of allotting the flat. It is

submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to allotment of the said

flat as his registration under NPR Scheme, 1979 was cancelled at his

behest.

4. The petitioner, on the other hand, has pointed out that he was

earlier residing in the joint family along with his brother at Bara

Hindu Rao. He has stated that the demand cum allotment letter WPC NO.2255/2008 Page 2 which was sent at the earlier address at Bara Hindu Rao, was

received by his brother, Mr.Subhash Chander Bhola who is running a

shop adjacent to the old residence of the petitioner. After the

petitioner came to know about the allotment, the petitioner searched

for the original papers and noticed that they were missing.

Accordingly, on 6th December, 2006 he had made a written complaint

to the SHO, P.S. Rohini, Sector-3, New Delhi about the loss of

original registration documents. The petitioner repeatedly met the

officers of DDA and made representations that someone had illegally

and fraudulently applied for refund of the registration amount and

there was no question of his asking for refund of the registration

amount after waiting for more than 25 years. The petitioner

submitted an affidavit on non-judicial stamp paper affirming his

statements on oath. Apart from visiting the Office of DDA, he also

attended the various public hearings representing and reiterating his

case but without success.

5. The petitioner in the rejoinder affidavit and additional affidavit

has made allegations against his brother and has stated that his

brother may have written letter dated 17.10.2006 to the DDA by

impersonating and forging the signatures of the petitioner. It is

further alleged that his brother may have come across the original WPC NO.2255/2008 Page 3 registration documents and taken them away when they were staying

together in the joint family.

6. Normally when disputed questions of facts are raised, it is

difficult for the writ Court to adjudicate on the basis of affidavits.

However, the facts of the present case entirely support the facts

pleaded by the petitioner. The petitioner had got himself registered

for allotment of a LIG flat under NPR Scheme, 1979 by depositing

Rs.1500/-. The allotment of the LIG flat was made to the petitioner

after a gap of more than 25 years in the draw of lots held on 23rd

March, 2006. The allotment was on hire purchase basis and not on

cash down basis. Allotment of flat after waiting for more than quarter

of a century is nothing less than a dream come true and a lottery. It

is difficult to perceive and accept that the petitioner would have

applied for cancellation of the said allotment and asked for refund of

the registration amount of Rs.1,500/-, instead of accepting the

allotment. This will be contrary to normal and acceptable human

conduct unless a person is mindless or besotted. The difference

between market price and allotment price is substantial and well

known. Allotment of an LIG flat is a windfall as the flats command a

substantial premium, which can be encashed.

7. In these circumstances, I believe and accept the statement of WPC NO.2255/2008 Page 4 the petitioner that he did not write the letter dated 17th October,

2006 asking for cancellation of registration. The registration amount

has not been refunded by DDA and remains with them. No cheque

for the refund amount has been issued to the petitioner.

8. The file notings reveal that after letter dated 17th October,

2006 was received, the matter was processed and the order of

cancellation was approved by Commissioner (Housing) only on 8th

December, 2006. Before the said date, the petitioner had already

written the letter dated 24th November, 2006 which reads as under:-

" Sir, Initially I was residing at 4882 Bara Hindu Rao Delhi-6. While I registered a flat from dDA during 1979. But I have shifted my residence at 304/D- 6/Sector-6 Rohini, Delhi. Due to some domestic problem i.e. eye site/heart. I could not intimate to you in time regarding my change of address.

Now I came to know that I have been allotted a Flat L.I.G. No. 228/Pkt/18B/Dwaraka, but upto date till I could not get my demand letter in r/o that flat. It may happened due to change of my address residence intimation.

Now you are requested to please either hand over the Demand letter to me by hand or post the same at my presence address as detailed below:-

Rajneesh Bhola 304/Pkt D-6/Sector-6, Rohini Delhi-85

Thanking you, Yours sincerely,

(RAJESH BHOLA) WPC NO.2255/2008 Page 5 S/O Late Sh. Ram Lal Bhola R/o 304, Pocket: D-6, Sec-6, Rohini, Delhi-85. (R) 27042567 98114554935"

9. A bare perusal of the said letter shows that the petitioner had

informed DDA that he was interested and wanted allotment and was

waiting for the demand cum allotment letter. DDA should have

immediately got cautious and suspicious about the letter dated 17th

October, 2006 after receiving the communication dated 24th

November, 2006. DDA should not have processed the case for

cancellation and passed cancellation order on 8th December, 2006. It

is also stated in the Petition that the petitioner on 7th December,

2006 had met Mr. J.P. Aggarwal, Director (Housing) in a public

hearing and had pointed out his case including the fact that he had

made a police complaint about loss of original registration papers. It

is not understandable why DDA proceeded to cancel the registration

on 8th December, 2006 after the petitioner had already appeared in

the public hearing and had pointed out to Mr.J.P.Aggarwal, Director

(Housing) the fact that he had never requested DDA to cancel his

registration.

10. In these circumstances, I allow the Writ Petition and direct

DDA to allot the said flat to the petitioner on the terms and

WPC NO.2255/2008 Page 6 conditions mentioned in the demand cum allotment letter. The

petitioner has already deposited Rs.11,92,283/- in terms of letter

dated 21st November, 2008 written by DDA. DDA will accordingly

verify the said deposit, process the case for handing over possession

and execute necessary documents of ownership. If the petitioner is

required to complete any formalities, he will be informed accordingly.

For this purpose, the petitioner will visit the Office of Commissioner

(Housing), DDA on 15th May, 2009 at 3.00 p.m.

Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.

SANJIV KHANNA, J.

     APRIL         24, 2009.
     P




WPC NO.2255/2008                                                 Page 7