HARI MOHAN GUPTA Vs. D D A

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Issue Rule. With consent of parties, the petition has been finally heard.

(2.) In these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution, a direction has been claimed for quashing the demand of respondent Delhi Development Authority ( DDA) in respect of a 60 square yard plot. Additionally, a direction has been sought to the DDA for charging the cost prevailing in 1989 in respect of the plot allotted to the petitioner.

(3.) The petitioner had initially registered himself in the housing scheme of DDA, known as the MIG (Middle Income Scheme), in 1971. In the year 1981, DDA launched another scheme known as the Residential Plots for the Rohini Residential Scheme (hereafter called "the Rohini scheme"). Existing registrants in other schemes, like the petitioner, were offered an option to apply under the Rohini Scheme, upon exercise of option, such registrants were given a "priority number" in the scheme. It appears that the scheme, accommodated different categories, which included 12% for such transferees known as "HUDCO" transferees. The petitioner opted, and was allotted a priority number. The petitioner did not, subsequently hear anything from DDA. A number of draw of lots were conducted by DDA, and several persons were allotted plots in the Rohini scheme. After a long passage of time, and on not being able to secure any plot, the petitioner applied for cancellation of his registration, in 2001, which was acceded to by DDA on 20-12-2001. A month later, the petitioner applied for restoration of his registration, upon becoming aware that the DDA was planning to make allotments to those who had waited for very long periods. The DDA acceded to this request, and restored the registration of the petitioner on 6th March, 2003.