CHARANJIT Vs. D.D.A.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner in this writ petition is aggrieved by the allotment of a flat, being Flat No.158, Third Floor, Peera Garhi, New Delhi in a dilapidated condition. The Petitioner is also aggrieved by the fact that the DDA has charged the Petitioner for the said flat for a plinth area of 100.80 sq. mtrs. whereas the actual plinth area of the demised flat is 78 sq. mtrs.

(2.) The facts briefly delineated are that the Petitioner had applied under general category for allotment of MIG flat under the DDA Housing Scheme, 2008 by depositing the required amount of ' 1,50,000/- as registration deposit. She was issued an Allotment-cum- Demand Letter dated 23.11.2009 allotting her Flat No.158, Third Floor, Peera Garhi at a total cost of Rs. 28,27,828/-. The said amount, after adjustment of registration money of Rs. 1,50,000/-, i.e., ' 26,77,828/- was payable by 21.2.2010 and with interest it could be paid latest by 22.5.2010, whereafter there was to be an automatic cancellation. On enquiries made, the Petitioner came to know that the approximate plinth area of the demised flat was only about 78 sq. mtrs. and that the same flats were offered to the general public by the DDA under Self Financing Scheme VIII (25.5.1995 4.7.1995). The Petitioner accordingly made a representation to the DDA on 3.12.2009 complaining about the same. It was further pointed out by the Petitioner that in RTI reply dated 9.2.2009 given to one Shri Ashok Kumar, DDA had admitted that the plinth area of MIG flats in Peera Garhi Residential Scheme were approximately 78 sq. mtrs. It was, therefore, requested that the matter be looked into and a correct demand letter by revising the cost of the demised flat on the basis of the correct plinth area (78 sq. mtrs.) be issued to the Petitioner.

(3.) In response to the aforesaid representation of the Petitioner, the DDA by a cryptic reply dated 8.2.2010 informed the Petitioner that the plinth area of the demised flat is 98.49 sq. mtrs., as per costing file, as supplied by Engineering Wing. This according to the Petitioner is also not correct as a similar flat under the same Scheme and the same area was allotted to one Smt. Treesha Antony at the cost of Rs. 22,43,955/- vide demand letter dated 23.11.2009, i.e., at a difference of Rs. 5,83,873/-.