RAJ KUMAR Vs. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common judgment, the aforementioned writ petitions seeking quashing of the allotment letters-cum-demand in respect of the housesunder the expandable housing scheme of 1996 are being decided. The petitioners in the writ petitions apart from quashing of the allotment-cum-demand letter, seek a mandamus to the respondent-DDA to charge as per the rates given in the brochure and not the increased rates as demanded in the allotment-cum-demand letter. Directions for handing over of possession is also sought with the stipulation that the charging of the cost be deferred till the houses are- fit for habitation.

(2.) The above writ petitions raised common questions of law and facts, and as such can be conveniently decided together. Arguments were heard with liberty given to supplement the said arguments or adopt the same. Mr. R.K. Saini and Mr. Sumit Bansal, counsel for the respective petitioners have been heard at length. During the course of proceedings the Commissioner (Housing) and Director (Housing) were summoned and directed to file affidavits with regard to provision and availability of basic amenities.

(3.) The facts giving rise to the writ petitions are as under.