RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD Vs. GAURI SHANKAR MODI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Appeal has been filed against the Order dtd. 20/7/2017 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Rajasthan, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as State Commission), whereby while allowing the Complaint the Opposite Party was directed to allot an independent house to the Complainant within three months at the prevailing rate in the year 2010. They were also directed to pay 5 lakh towards compensation and 21,000/- towards litigation cost.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the Appellant, Rajasthan Housing Board (hereinafter referred to as 'Housing Board') floated a General Registration Scheme 1979 for providing independent houses to the residents of Rajasthan State. The Complainant/Respondent registered himself under the said scheme for Lower Income Group category house in Jaipur City on Hire-Purchase basis and deposited registration amount of 1,800/- on 30/1/1980. As per the terms of the Registration Brochure, Houses were to be allotted in 5 to 7 years according to priority number of the Applicants. In the said Scheme 40% quota was fixed for salaried category (employees of Government and Private Institutions and Public Institutions). On 15/6/1982, the Complainant made an application for changing the category of house from Lower Income Group to Middle Income Group which was accepted by the Housing Board and he was given Priority No. H8/4133/JPR/M2/79. It is the case of the Complainant that since he was a Government Servant he was eligible for reservation. According to the Complainant in compliance of demand notice dtd. 24/9/2015 issued by the Housing Board, he deposited a sum of 2,34,462/- (2 lakh towards Seed-Money, 7,000/- towards Service Tax and 27,642/- towards Interest) with the Housing Board. Despite that after lapse of 34 years of Registration he has not been allotted any independent house by the Housing Board though the Applicants junior to him in priority and Applicants belonging to other Schemes launched by the Housing Board after the year 1979, have been allotted Houses. It is the case of the Complainant that he is residing in a rented property and he has been suffering financial loss due to non-allotment of the House by the Housing Board. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Appellant Housing Board, Complainant filed a Complaint before the State Commission.

(3.) The Appellant Housing Board contested the Complaint before the State Commission. They submitted that they have issued a letter on 2/11/1993 for depositing the seed-money in 3 instalments but the Complainant failed to deposit the said amount, therefore, he could not be allotted any House. Complainant wrote a letter to the Chairman of the Housing Board in the year 2007. Thereafter Complainant was asked to deposit his KYC documents and after completion of formalities he was reserved for a flat of MIG-B on 14/8/2014 and he was allotted a flat on 11. 03.2016. Complainant deposited the seed-money but did not take the possession of the said flat. Complainant contended that he never received the letter dtd. 2/11/1993. He also contended that he never issued any letter to the Chairman of the Housing Board. Although he admitted before the State Commission that he deposited the KYC documents and seed-money in compliance of the letter dtd. 14/8/2014. He also submitted that he did not accept the allotted flat as he had applied for an Independent House and not for a flat. It was the case of the Housing Board that since the signatures on the letter were different than his signatures available with them, therefore, his KYC documents were demanded and he was reserved for a flat in the year 2014 and the flat was allotted in the year 2016.