(1.) Rule. With consent of the parties the matter was heard for final disposal. Since common questions are involved, the petitions were heard together.
(2.) The writ petitioners in these cases were registrants in the New Pattern Registration Scheme (hereafter referred to as 'NPRS') formulated by the DDA in the year 1979. In both the cases allotments were issued upon maturing of their priority; in WP No. 22657/05 it was made in the year 1989 and in WP No. 4066/06 the allotment was made in the year 1999. However, both the petitioners complain that they did not receive the demand-cum-allotment letter since such letters/intimations were despatched to old addresses. It is claimed that the petitioners had duly intimated to the DDA about their respective change of addresses but in stead of despatching the demand-cum-allotment to the new addresses, they were sent to the old addresses. As a result, they could not comply with the demand and the allotments were cancelled.
(3.) The petitioners further state that recently they approached the DDA and it indicated that they would be entitled to restoration and their names would be placed in the draw of lots. In these circumstances, they have approached the Court claiming for relief. Ms. Richa Kapoor, learned counsel contends that the petitioner in WP NO. 22657/05 is entitled to the benefit of the latest policies of the DDA including the circular dated 12.04.05 which prescribes that wherever the allottee is not at fault the interest to be charged would be 7 per cent per annum in addition to the original old rates. In this case, the petitioner had been allotted a flat in 1989; the DDA had indicated that he would be granted a fresh allotment as per the old cost by its letter dated 15.06.04. His name was, however, included in the draw of lots held on 07.04.05; The DDA noticed that the allotment of the flat was under a mistake since it had earlier been allotted to someone else. Subsequently, the petitioner's name was again included in the draw of lots held on 10.05.05.