LAWS(DLH)-2013-12-142

V.P.SUNITA Vs. DDA

Decided On December 17, 2013
V.P.Sunita Appellant
V/S
DDA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY virtue of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner seeks restoration of allotment and handing over the possession of the MIG Flat No.239, (Ground Floor), Sector 14, Pocket B, Phase -2, Dwarka, New Delhi as the entire payment of the flat has already been made to the DDA.

(2.) ON 29.12.1989, the Petitioner applied for allotment of an MIG flat under the Ambedkar Awas Yojna being a member of Scheduled Caste category. She paid a sum of Rs.12,200/ - as registration and processing fee and was allotted Registration No.9335 and Priority No.5881. On 31.12.2002, the Petitioner was declared successful in the draw of lots and was allotted the flat mentioned earlier. As per the demand -cum -allotment letter (DAL) dated 24 -31.03.2003 mailed at the Petitioner's local address, she was required to make payment of Rs.5,50,279/ - upto 30.05.2003. The Petitioner was further given the option to pay the amount with interest, i.e. Rs.5,70,632/ - by 28.08.2003. Since the Petitioner had applied for allotment under the hire purchase scheme, the balance cost of the flat was payable by the Petitioner in 120 monthly instalments of Rs.6810/ - per month commencing from 10.07.2003.

(3.) THE Petitioner then applied for conversion of the flat from hire purchase scheme to cash down basis. A sum of Rs.6,50,000/ - as demanded by the DDA was duly paid. By a letter dated 15.09.2005, the DDA asked the Petitioner to make the balance payment of Rs.1373/ - which was also made by the Petitioner on 19.10.2005. Although the Petitioner's case was being processed for restoration of the allotment, however, by a letter dated 11.07.2006 (Annexure R -2), the request for restoration of the allotment was cancelled in spite of the fact that the Petitioner had paid the restoration charges as demanded by the DDA. The Petitioner then made a representation to the Vice Chairman and to the Lt. Governor of Delhi in the capacity of the Chairman, DDA. However, the same were also rejected, hence the writ petition.