(1.) This revision is directed against the order of the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panchkula (in short, 'the State Commission.") dated 15.3.2013 in first appeal No.159/2013 whereby the State Commission dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of the District Forum Panchkula in consumer complaint No.70/2012.
(2.) Briefly put facts relevant for the disposal of this revision petition are that the respondent pursuant to the directions of the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in a writ petition formulated a policy known as Ashiana/JNNRUM scheme for allotment of EWS plots to the jhuggi jhopdi dwellers at HUDA land. The original scheme was applicable only to those jhuggi dwellers who were party / petitioners in the matters pending before the High Court / Supreme Court. The policy was further modified on 10.02.2010 to accommodate more persons with a view to get the jhuggis cleared. The respondent opposite party further came out with a policy dated 24.10.2011 to include the names of the persons appearing in the Survey list who were presently living in a jhuggi in Azad Bharat Colony in the list of eligible persons for allotment of flat.
(3.) The petitioner filed a consumer complaint in District Forum Panchkula claiming that pursuant to the aforesaid scheme floated by HUDA, he applied for allotment under Ashiyana/JNNURM scheme and deposited a sum of Rs.8000/- in the HUDA bank account maintained in Indian Bank Sector 6 Panchkula. It is the case of the complainant that though he had applied for allotment and deposited the fee, he was not allotted a plot or a flat under the scheme. The complainant visited HUDA office on many occasions to find out the fate of his application but in vain. For those visits, he incurred expense of Rs.4400/- for each trip. Claiming the failure of the respondent to allot the plot / flat to be deficiency in service, the petitioner filed a consumer complaint seeking directions to the HUDA to allot him a plot of 100 sq. yds under the above noted policy as the complainant belong to economically weaker section. The complainant also prayed for award on compensation.