RAJESH KHANNA Vs. D.D.A.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SMT . Aruna Khanna, mother of the petitioner got herself registered under Rohini Residential Scheme of DDA for allotment of an LIG plot. She expired on 28.6.1999. In a draw of lot held on 11.6.2003, an LIG plot measuring 32 square meters bearing number 608, Pocket-C-I, Sector-28, Rohini came to be allotted in her name and a demand-cum-allotment letter bearing block date 5.9.2003/12.9.2003 was issued requiring deposit of cost of the plot in three instalments as per the schedule mentioned in the demand letter. The petitioner, who is the son of Smt. Aruna Khanna, informed DDA on 28.10.2003 about the death of his mother. Pursuant to the documents submitted by him, he was recognized as the registrant/ allottee in place of Smt. Aruna Khanna vide DDA's letter dated 5.5.2005. The petitioner, however, was asked by DDA to furnish ownership proof in respect of quarter number111, Vashdev Nagar which had been given by him as his residential address. In compliance of the said requirement, the petitioner submitted a conveyance deed of the aforesaid quarter executed in favour of his father late Shri Kewal Krishan Khanna. A show cause notice dated 30.4.2007 was then issued to the petitioner, and the allotment came to be cancelled vide cancellation letter dated 1.1.2008.

(2.) THE petitioner filed a petition being W.P(C) No.454/2009 seeking quashing of the cancellation order. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 10.3.2010 with direction to DDA to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 19.1.2009, give personal hearing to him and thereafter pass a reasoned order within ten weeks of the disposal of the writ petition. The said order came to be passed after noting the contention of the petitioner that the area of the plot allotted to his father was only 15.02 square meter. Since the DDA did not comply with the order dated 10.3.2010, a contempt petition came to be filed by the petitioner against it. Another direction was issued by this Court on 10.3.2010 requiring DDA to consider the representation of the petitioner afresh after taking into account all the facts of the case. Thereafter an order dated 1.2.2013 was passed by DDA rejecting the representation of the petitioner for restoration of the plot on the ground that the terms and conditions of the plot under Rohini Residential Scheme did not permit allotment of a plot as the husband of the allottee already owned a residential plot in his name. Being aggrieved from the said order, the petitioner is again before the Court.

(3.) THE issue involved in this case came to be considered by a Division Bench of this Court in Delhi Development Authority versus B.B. Jain [LPA No.670/2012 decided on 5.3.2013] and the following view was taken: