Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2007 DAILYLAW 2282 (DEL)

D. D. A. v. SUSHILA SHARMA

2007-09-13

Sanjiv Khanna

body2007
( 1 ) THE present appeal is filed by the DDA challenging the legality of the order dated 5th December, 2005 passed by the learned Single Judge directing the appellant to allot a flat to the respondent in the LIG category on payment of current rate. By Order dated 4th May, 2007, we had stayed the operation of the impugned judgment. Matter is listed today for arguments, on which we have heard learned counsel for the parties. They have also taken us through the records. ( 2 ) RESIDENTIAL accommodation of the respondent was demolished by the DDA during emergency. A policy was framed by the appellant under which all persons whose houses in Patparganj area were demolished during emergency were to be allotted alternative accommodation. The respondent took advantage of the aforesaid policy and submitted an application seeking an allotment of an alternative flat. It appears that an order was passed on the said application by the Executive Officer to allot a Janta Flat to the respondent. Consequent thereto, a Janta Flat No. 271, Madipur, Delhi was allotted to the respondent on hire purchase basis. ( 3 ) THE respondent made a number of representations to the appellant contending, inter alia, that the appellant should at least allot her a MIG flat. The aforesaid grievance of the respondent was considered by the lieutenant Governor and he forwarded the her application to the Vice Chairman, dda. While forwarding the said application, the Lieutenant Governor endorsed the remark that the respondent be given a LIG Flat instead of Janta Flat. However, even the aforesaid recommendation of the Lieutenant Governor was ignored and the appellant did not change their earlier order and instead cancelled the allotment of the Janta Flat allotted in favour of the respondent on the ground that payment for the flat was not made. The Presiding Officer of the permanent Lok Adalat also passed a similar order for allotment of LIG Flat but the same was not accepted by the appellant. ( 4 ) BEING aggrieved, a writ petition was filed by the respondent where various contentions were raised. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the records, the learned Single Judge directed that a lig flat be allotted to the respondent, but on current rates. ( 4 ) BEING aggrieved, a writ petition was filed by the respondent where various contentions were raised. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the records, the learned Single Judge directed that a lig flat be allotted to the respondent, but on current rates. ( 5 ) LEARNED counsel for the appellant has submitted before us that as per the policy, the respondent was entitled to a Janta Flat only and accordingly a janta Flat was allotted to her. However, the fact remains that there was reconsideration of the matter on the request of the respondent, the contentions raised by the respondent were found genuine and bona fide even by the Lieutenant governor and on that basis, he had made an endorsement that the respondent be given a LIG Flat instead of a Janta Flat. The learned Single Judge has also passed an order that a LIG flat be given in favour of the respondent, but the same would be available to her on payment of the current cost. In our considered opinion, the aforesaid directions issued by the learned Single Judge fully and squarely protects interests of both the parties, as the respondent was entitled for allotment of alternative flat. The only dispute is with regard to the size of the flat. The respondent claims that she was in occupation of a four bed room tenement, which was demolished during the period of emergency. As per her claim she is entitled to MIG flat, but her claim for LIG flat has been accepted by the learned Single Judge. The appellant disputes the area/rooms which were occupied by the respondent and thereafter demolished but both the Lt. Governor and the permanent Lok Adalat have opined in her favour. ( 6 ) CONSIDERING the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that interest of both the parties shall be fully protected if an order is passed directing allotment of a LIG flat in favour of the respondent in any part of Delhi, subject to the respondent depositing and paying current cost of the flat as demanded by the DDA. Payment shall have to be made in terms of the schedule as fixed by the appellant in accordance with law/policy. Payment shall have to be made in terms of the schedule as fixed by the appellant in accordance with law/policy. We expect that the allotment-cum-demand letter shall be issued to the respondent within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order by the appellant. ( 7 ) IN terms of the aforesaid order, the appeal stands disposed of. Consequently, the application for condonation of delay also stands disposed of. Copy of the order be given dasti to the learned counsel for the parties.