SUNITA RANI Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ISSUE Notice. Ms. Sangeeta Chandra, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of DDA and submits that appeal can be disposed of at this stage since she has instructions to make a statement. Mr. N.C. Bhatt, Assistant Director (Commercial Estate) is present in Court and has brought the relevant files. Learned Counsel states that the Petitioner's name can be included in the forthcoming draw of lots, since she is entitled to a commercial unit, as per this Court's order of 04.09.2006, and that after her claim is satisfied, the draw of lots vis   -vis other applicants in the reserved categories would be held.

(2.) THE brief facts are that the Petitioner had occasion to approach this Court several times in the past. She belongs to the category of reserved candidates entitled to a fixed quota from amongst the shops available for allotment to eligible candidates. After her earlier Writ Petition No. 2673/2003 was disposed of, the DDA took the position that the directions in that order merely resulted in an entitlement for the Petitioner's name to be included in the draw of lots. The Petitioner sought to initiate contempt proceedings but was unsuccessful. Similarly, the attempt to seek clarification of the order was unsuccessful too. She was constrained to file another Writ Petition No. 9871/2006 where the Court after considering the records of the DDA, as well as in other disposed of Writ Petitions, was of the view that the stand of the DDA was unfair and arbitrary since it amounted to discrimination between the two members of the same class, i.e. reserved eligible candidates for allotment of such shop units.

(3.) IT is a matter of record that the DDA wrote to the Petitioner, as well as others on 12.02.2007 stating about availability of shops in certain market areas. The Petitioner's position was that the entire facts were not disclosed, that the inventory of all the shops was not made available and deliberately concealed.