Indu Sharma vs D.D.A.
2013 Latest Caselaw 2124 Del

       *       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                      Date of Decision: 08.05.2013

+      W.P.(C) 7959/2012 and CM 19935/2012(for stay)

       INDU SHARMA                                         ..... Petitioner

                          Through:Mr.R.K.Saini, Advocate.

                          versus

       D.D.A.                                       ..... Respondent

                          Through:Ms.Manika Tripathy Pandey with

                          Mr.Ashutosh Kaushik, Advocates.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.JAIN

                          JUDGMENT

V.K.JAIN, J. (ORAL)

1. Late Shri Nityanand Sharma, father of the petitioner got registered under

Rohini Residential Scheme, 1981 of Delhi Development Authority for allotment of

a residential plot. On the death of Shri Nityanand Sharma on 20 th May, 2002, the

petitioner, who is his divorced daughter, applied for mutation of the registration in

her name and the same was allowed by DDA, vide her letter 3rd September, 2003.

Subsequent to mutation of the registration in favour of the petitioner, a plot bearing

No.932, Pocket-C, Block-I, Sector-28, Rohini measuring 32 sq. mtrs. was allotted

to the petitioner in the draw of lots held on 11 th June, 2003. The Allotment Letter

dated 6th October, 2003 was then issued to the petitioner asking her to deposit a

sum of Rs.38439/- by 5th December, 2003, Rs.6244/- by 4th February, 2004 and

Rs.18667/- by 31st December, 2004. The amount demanded by DDA was duly

deposited by the petitioner in time but instead of issuing Possession Letter to the

petitioner, the respondent issued a show cause notice dated 13 th December, 2005

stating therein as under:-

"Whereas the Registrant/Allottee had died and after his death the Registration/Allotment was transferred in the name of Miss Indu Sharma d/o late Sh. Nitya Nand Sharma vide this office letter dt.3.9.03 and amended demand cum allotment letter was issued to Miss Indu Sharma on 6.10.2003. As per the terms and conditions of the demand cum allotment letter, the allottee was required to pay the Ist, IInd and IIIrd Instalments of premium of plot/land within the stipulated period, mentioned in the demand letter.

It has been noticed from the House Tax Receipt submitted that Smt.Kusum Sharma w/o late Sh.Nitya Nand Sharma is holding Property No.A-3/106/107 Sector 11, Rohini, Delhi-85 in her name whereas while applying for mutation she had furnished documents showing property No.106 in the name of Alexander Wilson and 107 in the name of Meera Chopra and as per policy the Registrant or his wife including minor children is eligible for only one property from DDA."

2. The petitioner replied to the show cause notice received from DDA on 27 th

December, 2005. The following was the stand taken by the petitioner in her reply:-

"... In view of the above this is quite clear that neither any property was in the name of my father at the time of registration nor there is any property

in my name except the plot under reply transferred in my name. You will appreciate that both of us father & daughter were major and have not committed any breach. As such it is requested that the show cause notice may be withdrawn and the possession of the plot may be released so that I may also think of my establishment."

3. No decision has so far been taken by DDA on the aforesaid show cause

notice though the petitioner was asked to submit an attested copy of the Office

letter dated 3rd September, 2003 whereby the registration was transferred in her

name. Being aggrieved by DDA not handing over possession of the aforesaid plot

to her, the petitioner is before this Court by way of this writ petition.

4. In its counter-affidavit, the respondent DDA has alleged that on scrutiny of

the papers submitted by the petitioner, it transpired that she was asked to submit

proof of ownership of Pocket A-3/106/107, Sector-11, Rohini which had been

referred in those documents. The petitioner submitted documents, such as,

Demand Letter, Possession Letter, Allotment Letter etc. in respect of property 106,

Pocket-3, Block-A, Sector-11, Rohini as well as photocopy of documents in respect

of Flat No.107, Pocket-3, Block-A, Sector-11, Rohini. Vide subsequent letters

dated 7th September, 2005 and 28th October, 2005 DDA requested the petitioner to

submit attested copy of the ownership roof/latest House Tax Receipts whereupon

the petitioner produced a copy of House Tax Receipts in respect of Property No.A-

3/106, and 107, Sector-11, Rohini, Delhi which stands in the name of her mother

Smt. Kusum Sharma w/o Late Shri Nityanand Sharma. It would be pertinent to

note here that at the time of seeking mutation, the petitioner had furnished

documents showing Property No.106 in the name of Meera Chopra and the name

of Smt.Kusum Sharma was not disclosed at that time, as the owner of the aforesaid

two properties. Based upon the information gathered from the House Tax

Receipts, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 13 th December, 2005

which was responded by the petitioner on 27th December, 2005. Thus, the case of

the respondent is that the petitioner at the time of obtaining mutation of the

registration in her name had concealed the fact that Property No.A-3/106, and 107,

Sector-11, Rohini, Delhi were owned by her mother. It is also stated in their

counter-affidavit that the petitioner made a representation to Lt.Governor of Delhi

which was examined and rejected vide letter dated 26th December, 2012.

5. It would be seen from the counter-affidavit filed by DDA that no decision

has so far been taken by it on the show cause noticed dated 13 th December, 2005

which it had issued to the petitioner. Having issued the show-cause notice and

received reply, DDA was required to take the matter to its original conclusion by

passing an appropriate order in the matter after considering the reply and the

documents, if any, submitted by the petitioner in support of her reply. That having

not been done, the Court is not in a position to know what is the decision of DDA

taken on the basis of the reply and documents furnished by the petitioner. It is only

after the decision in the matter is taken by DDA, that the Court can go into the

correctness or otherwise of such decision. In these circumstances, the writ petition

is disposed of by directing the Director (RL), DDA to give an opportunity of

hearing to the petitioner in his office at 3.00 p.m. on 27th May, 2013 and thereafter

take an appropriate decision pursuant to the show cause notice dated 13 th

December, 2005 issued by it to the petitioner. The petitioner is permitted to file

additional documents, if any, within a period of 10 days from today to Director

(RL), DDA along with a supplementary reply, if any. The decision, so taken, shall

be conveyed to the petitioner within one week thereafter. If the petitioner is

aggrieved from the decision taken by DDA, it shall be open to her to avail such

remedies as are available to her, in law.

A copy of this order be given Dasti.

V.K. JAIN, J

MAY 08, 2013 ks