RAJENDER KUMAR KHATRI Vs. DDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE two petitioners seek mandamus for issuance of a demand cum allotment letter in their favour in respect of MIG flat bearing no.9TA, Sector-23, Pocket-3, Rohini, Delhi or of any alternative MIG flat. THE case of the petitioners is, that their brother Sh. Vipin Kumar Khatri was a registrant for a Janta Flat in the New Pattern Registration Scheme (NPRS) of the year 1979 of the respondent DDA; that he, in the year 1986 got the registration converted from that for a Janta Flat to an MIG flat; that accordingly a new priority number was allotted to him and put in the tail end category; that their said brother Sh. Vipin Kumar Khatri died on 20th August, 1992 leaving the petitioners as his two brothers and only legal heirs; that no allotment was made in pursuance to the registration aforesaid; that the petitioners in January, 2006 on making enquiries learnt that allotment of MIG flats under the NPRS had been completed; on making further enquiries they learnt that Flat No.9TA, Sector-23, Pocket-3, Rohini, Delhi was allotted by the respondent DDA against the said registration, in the tail end draws held in the year 2004 in the name of their brother. THE petitioners contending that no demand letter was ever received by the registrant as he had already expired, represented to the respondent DDA in April, 2006 for mutation of the registration in their names and for issuance of demand cum allotment letter with respect to the flat allotted in the year 2004 in their favour. THE petitioners claim that though notings of some of the officials on the file of DDA favour them but ultimately the deciding authorities of the respondent DDA though affected the mutation of the registration from the name of their brother Sh. Vipin Kumar Khatri to the joint names of the petitioners but only for the purposes of refund of the registration amount and not for allotment. Aggrieved therefrom this petition was preferred.

(2.) NOTICE of the petition was issued. On 3rd November, 2008 the counsel for the respondent DDA informed this Court that the flat earlier allotted to Sh. Vipin Kumar Khatri is no longer available and had been allotted to some other person. Pleadings have been completed. Counsels have been heard.

(3.) THOUGH the counsel for the petitioners attempted to base her case on the basis of the favourable notings on the file of the some of the processing officials of the respondent DDA inter alia to the effect that the case of the petitioners is covered by the Death Case Policy of the respondent DDA but the final decision making authorities of the respondent DDA having disapproved of the said views of the processing officials and having held the petitioners to be not entitled to be covered under or to the benefit of the said Policy, no reliance thereon is permitted. The Apex Court recently in Sethi Auto Service Station Vs. DDA (2009) 1 SCC 180 and in Jasbir Singh Chhabra Vs. State of Punjab (2010) 4 SCC 192 has reiterated that favourable notings during the decision making process cannot form the basis of a claim when the ultimate decision making authority has decided against the claimants.