SATYA PAL BATRA Vs. D D A

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:-

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that in February, 1981 the respondent DDA announced a Scheme for allotment of flats under MIG, LIG and Janta categories to the Citizens of India. On March 27, 1981, Smt. Sanno Devi, his wife got herself registered with the DDA vide application No.88759 and deposited Rs. 2,000/- vide Rohini Registration Receipt No. 7/662 for allotment of LIG plot under the said Scheme. On August 04, 1982 unfortunately his wife Smt. Sanno Devi passed away leaving the petitioner as her only legal heir. The DDA, on December 13, 1983, vide allotment cum demand letter allotted LIG Plot No.040, Pocket No.01, Block No.-A, Sector-04, Rohini, Delhi measuring 33 sq. meters to his wife and directed to deposit Rs. 1816.18/- within 30 days from the receipt of the said letter.

(3.) On December 20, 1983 the petitioner deposited the amount of Rs. 1816.18/-. On January 30, 1984, the petitioner informed the DDA that his wife has passed away on August 04, 1982. He had enclosed a death certificate along with the said letter. He requested that the plot allotted, be given to him as per policy and rules. The DDA vide letter dated June 02, 1984 in the name of the wife of the petitioner informed that on scrutiny it was found that she had not submitted certain documents such as affidavit/undertaking as required in the Brochure. It is the case of the petitioner that he vide letter dated July 18, 1984, again informed the DDA that his wife had passed away. He further informed that after her death, the petitioner is her only legal heir, as she died issueless. It is the case of the petitioner that way back on January 30, 1984, the petitioner had applied for mutation and submitted required documents as demanded by DDA but DDA had not responded positively. It is the case of the petitioner that despite making the payment of entire demanded amount of money within the stipulated time to the DDA and visiting the office of DDA several times and requesting to mutate and transfer the said registration in his favour, the DDA did not respond for the reasons best known to them. It is averred that the DDA being a statutory authority should act fairly, in just proper and legal manner without any discrimination, favour.