NOORJAHAN Vs. COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner assails the communication dtd. 23/12/2015 by which the petitioner was informed that her request for allotment of the shop cannot be considered on account of the efflux of about ten years.

(2.) The petitioner's husband, M.Rajkapoor, had applied for allotment of a shop at a shopping complex constructed by the second respondent. Initially, the petitioner's husband had deposited a sum of Rs.20,000.00 (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) as earnest money deposit. Thereafter, on 28/7/2002, the petitioner's husband died. Since further amounts were due and payable in relation to the allotment of the shop, the petitioner remitted a sum of Rs.65,000.00 (Rupees Sixty Five Thousand only) on 15/7/2005 by way of a demand draft. It appears that the shop was allotted to the petitioner's husband on 31/1/2006. According to the petitioner, she had shifted to Trichy and therefore did not receive the communication regarding the allotment. The petitioner further states that she became aware of such allotment only in September 2015 when she visited the office of the District Agriculture Warehousing Association. Immediately, a representation dtd. 16/12/2015 was issued and the said representation was rejected by the impugned communication. Hence, this writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was unable to follow-up on the allotment on account of having shifted to Trichy in connection with her children's education. He further submits that the shop remains vacant and that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay all prescribed charges if the shop is allotted to the petitioner.