ISHWAR DASS GUPTA Vs. D D A
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
ISHWAR DASS GUPTA
D D A
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) This appeal is filed against the order dated 24th July, 2007, passed by
the learned Single Judge, dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant
herein on the ground of delay and laches.
(2.) The appellant herein applied for allotment of a MIG flat under the New
Pattern Registration Scheme(NPRS), 1979 which was promulgated by the DDA in the
year 1979. In 1986 the allotment of flats to the registrants of the aforesaid
scheme on hire purchase was abandoned by the DDA and thereafter all the demand-
cum-allotment letters were issued on cash down basis to the allottees. In
December, 1992 DDA issued a demand-cum-allotment letter to the appellant in
respect of a flat in Rohini on cash down basis. At that stage he did not pay
the amount demanded from him and has alleged in the writ petition that he kept
visiting the office of the DDA with a request that he be allotted a flat on hire
(3.) In the year 1997, a writ petition was filed by some of the NPRS
applicants which was registered as WP(C) No.3822/1997. By an order dated 29th
January, 1998, the said writ petition was disposed of by this Court directing
that 50% allotment would be made on hire purchase and 50% on cash down basis.
It may, however, be noted that though the appellant was not one of the
petitioners in the said writ petition, he sought to take advantage of the same
by filing a representation to the Lt. Governor of Delhi on 7th February, 2001
i.e after about 3 years from the date of the order. Prior to that, the
appellant made a representation to the DDA on 11th March, 1993. Therefore, as
against the issuance of the demand-cum-allotment letter in December, 1992,
directing him to deposit the amount on cash down basis, the first representation
made by the appellant was on 11th March, 1993 and thereafter he kept silent for
eight years till he filed the aforesaid representation dated 7th February, 2001.
The next representation was made by the petitioner to the DDA on 4th
September, 2006 and when no response was received, a writ petition was filed in
this Court on 25th September, 2006 with a prayer that his name be included in
the draw of lots with issuance of fresh allotment-cum-demand letter in Dwarka,
Kondli Gharoli at the same cost as charged from the other allottees in the
previous years, when his name ought to have been included. In the said writ
petition, DDA filed the reply wherein it was stated that the appellant did not
follow up his representation and as a matter of fact he applied for refund of
his money on 2nd May, 1997. The said fact was not mentioned in the writ
petition and that is also one of the grounds for rejecting the writ petition.
While dismissing the writ petition, the learned Single Judge took note of the
submission made by the DDA that the appellant having applied for refund of his
money, there was no possibility of his name being included in the draw of lots,
After considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of
the fact that there is unexplained delay in pursuing the matter by the
appellant, we find no error in the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
The appeal has no merit and is dismissed.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.