DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. AMEET KUMAR KHANDELWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS intra-court appeal impugns the order dated 07.02.2011 of the learned Single Judge allowing W.P.(C) No.7245/2010 preferred by the respondent and directing the appellant Delhi Development Authority (DDA) to hold a mini draw and allot an MIG flat to the respondent "as per the old cost, together with interest as per the DDA Policy".

(2.) THE writ petition was filed pleading, i) that the deceased father of the respondent was a registrant with the appellant DDA for an MIG flat under the New Pattern Registration Scheme of the year 1979; ii) he however expired on 14.05.1999, before any allotment was made in his favour pursuant to the said registration; iii) that in the draw of lots held on 31.05.2002, against the aforesaid registration, flat No.318, Pocket-B, Sector 13, Second Floor, Dwarka, Phase-II was allotted and the demand- cum-allotment letter addressed to the deceased father of the respondent was sent at the residential address furnished at the time of registration but which was received back with the postal endorsement "house remaining locked from long time and returned"; iv) that even though the deceased father of the respondent had at the time of registration also furnished his occupational address but no copy of the demand-cum-allotment letter was sent at the said occupational address, though required to be sent as per Policy of the DDA; v) that though after the demise of the father of the respondent no one was staying in the house of which residential address was given, but had the demand-cum-allotment letter been sent at the occupational address of the deceased father of the respondent, the respondent would have learnt of the same; vi) that the respondent on 04.04.2005 had a personal hearing with the Assistant Director (MIG) of the DDA in which intimation of the demise of the father, allotment in the year 2002 and request for mutation in the name of the respondent was made; vii) that in the public hearing on 30.10.2006 held by the Director (Housing) of the DDA also, the respondent made representation; viii) that the respondent similarly participated in another personal hearing on 05.02.2007 but receiving no response, on 10.07.2008 sent a representation by registered post; ix) still not getting any response, another representation was personally delivered on 06.10.2009; x) that in response dated 14.01.2010, the respondent was asked to furnish the necessary documents and on 13.05.2010 registration was mutated from the name of the father (only for the purpose of refund of registration money) to his name; xi) however still no flat was allotted. The respondent in the circumstances, in the year 2010, filed the writ petition from which this appeal arises, contending that the cancellation of allotment of the year 2002 owing to the demand-cum-allotment letter remaining uncomplied was bad since the demand-cum-allotment letter was not sent at the occupational address of the deceased father of the respondent inspite of being so required to be sent as per the Policy of the DDA. Relief, of commanding the appellant DDA to allot alternate flat to the respondent was claimed in the writ petition.

(3.) IT appears that no rejoinder was filed by the respondent to the aforesaid counter affidavit.