(1.) In this revision petition, challenge has been made to the impugned order dated 21.7.2011, passed by the Haryana State Consumer Disputes ''Redressal Commission, Panchkula (hereinafter Referred as 'State Commission') in First Appeal No. 907 of 2010, Chief Administrator, Housing Board, Haryana v. Sukhbir Singh Saini , vide which, the order passed by the District Forum, Gurgaon dated 7.5.2010 in Consumer Complaint No. 755 of 2008, filed by the present Respondent/Complainant was upheld.
(2.) Brief facts are that the complainant/respondent applied for allotment of a flat with the Petitioner-Housing Board, Haryana in pursuance of their offer for allotment of 1590 built-up flats of different categories at Dharuhera, Sonipat and Bhiwani on Hire-Purchase basis, for which the period of registration was 2nd July, 2007 to 31st July, 2007. The complainant made an application for allotment of a HIG flat at Dharuhera, Sector-5, Part-II, with cost of Rs. 11.90 lacs under reserved category for Scheduled Caste (SC), although he belongs to Saini caste, which comes under the Backward Class (BC) category. Under the terms and conditions of the offer as contained in the Brochure published by the petitioner for the Scheme, a sum of Rs. 1.20 lacs was payable along with the application and another sum of Rs. 1.80 lacs (total Rs. 3.00 lacs) was payable after the draw of lots. It was also stated under the head, 'Financing Scheme' in the Brochure that if an applicant was not able to deposit the application money (Rs. 1.20 lacs in this case), he may opt to obtain finance from the Board by depositing a particular amount as "Financing Charges", which in the present case was Rs. 4,800. The complainant paid a sum of Rs. 4,800 along with his application and submitted the same within the period prescribed. The complainant was declared successful in the draw of lots held on 30.1.2008. An allotment letter was sent to him by the petitioner on 27.2.2008, asking him to deposit a sum of Rs. 3 lacs, on account of registration amount of Rs. 1.20 lacs plus an amount of Rs. 1.80 lacs to be deposited after the draw of lots. The petitioner was also asked to submit documentary proof about his belonging to the reservation category, as applied for. The petitioner sent a show cause notice dated 12.9.2008 followed by another show cause notice dated 3.10.2008, asking the complainant to submit documentary proof of belonging to Scheduled Caste, otherwise his allotment would be cancelled and 10% of the registration amount deposited by him will be forfeited. On failure of the complainant to submit the Scheduled Caste Certificate, the petitioner vide letter dated 5.11.2008 cancelled the said allotment and stated that 10% of the registration amount had been forfeited and the balance amount will be refunded to him separately. Accordingly, the petitioner sent a cheque of Rs. 2,88,000 dated 3.12.2008 to the complainant as refund.
(3.) Following the receipt of the cancellation letter dated 5.11.2008, the complainant filed the consumer complaint in question, seeking direction to the petitioner for not cancelling the said allotment and to pay him a sum of Rs. 1,00,000 as compensation for mental harassment and Rs. 21,000 as cost of litigation.