22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5429/2007 % Judgment Delivered on: 18.02.2010 HARISH GUJRAL & ANR ..... Petitioner Through: Ms.Kalpana Sonker, Advocate versus D.D.A. ..... Respondent Through: Ms.Sobhna Takiar, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI 1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? G.S.SISTANI, J. (ORAL) 1. Rule. With the consent of counsel for the parties, present petition is set down for final hearing and disposal. 2. In this case in the year in the year 1979 father of the petitioners (Sh.Sardari Lal) applied for allotment of a flat in MIG category and deposited Rs.4,500/- on 07.09.1979. In September, 1992 father of the petitioners expired and information with regard to death of Sh.Sardari Lal was sent to the DDA on 18.6.1997. DDA was also informed about the change of residential address from 251, Phatak, Kharor, Ajmeri Gate, to D-III/7, National Bank Staff Quarters, Jagat Pura, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan. Assistant Director (MIG) Housing, AAY/NP vide letter dated 14.08.1997, acknowledged the communication dated 18.06.1997 sent by mother of petitioner with regard to change of residential address, for further correspondence. Subsequently on 05.12.2001 mother of the petitioner shifted from D-III/7, National Bank Staff Quarters, Jagat Pura, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur, Rajasthan to C-48, Anand Vihar, Railway colony, Jagat Pura, Jaipur. This information was also supplied to the DDA. Mother of the petitioners expired on 14.04.2004. 3. Upon demise of their mother, petitioners found the registration receipt and letters written to the respondent-DDA. Consequent to which petitioners made enquiries from DDA and learnt that demand/ allotment letter was sent at the wrong address i.e. Johnpur instead of Jaipur, Rajasthan. On 04.05.2006 petitioner no.1 sent a letter by registered post and called upon the DDA to intimate the status of their priority number and also to correct the address in their record for future correspondence. Thereafter another letter was sent to the DDA on 23.05.2006 by petitioner no.1, however, no response was received. Petitioner made an application to the DDA under Right to Information Act on 29.01.2007 when he learnt that petitioners had been allotted flat bearing No.127, Sector-17, Pocket-E, Dwarka on 13.02.2002, however, allotment stood cancelled, as the money was not deposited. Thereafter all efforts were made by the petitioners to convince the DDA that they did not received the demand/ allotment letter, which fell on deaf ears. Petitioner has thereafter knocked the doors of this court for justice, by filing the present petition. 4. Counsel for DDA submits that it is not in dispute that despite petitioner having informed the DDA about the change of his address, demand/ allotment letter was sent at the wrong address. Accordingly, the case of the petitioner stands covered by the wrong address policy of the DDA dated 25.02.2005. The demand/ allotment letter was issued to the petitioner in 2002. Admittedly, petitioner approached the DDA on 04.05.2006. 5. An affidavit has been filed by the DDA, according to which the demand/ allotment letter was issued on 20.03.2002. 6. Affidavit has been filed by the DDA wherein it has been admitted that the original registrant expired and thereafter his wife requested W.P.(C) 5429/2007 2/4 for change of address in 1997. Similar request was made on 05.12.2001 for change of address. On 13.02.2002 in the draw held an MIG flat was allotted to the petitioner, however, demand/ allotment letter was sent at the wrong address and pursuant thereto in 2004, allotment was cancelled. It is further admitted in the affidavit that since the demand/ allotment letter was issued at the wrong address, the case of the petitioner is fully covered under the office order dated 25.02.2005. As per the office order, in case demand/ allotment letter was sent at the wrong address and the allottee approaches the DDA within a period of four years from the date of allotment, he/ she shall be allotted flat at the old cost prevalent when the priority of the allottee matured without any interest, however, in case where the allottee does not approach the DDA within four years, the allottee shall pay 12% simple interest at the old cost. 7. Hence, it is submitted by counsel for DDA that petitioner would be liable to pay interest from 20.03.2002 to a period later than six months from 04.05.2006, as this can be treated reasonable period spent by the DDA to process the case of the petitioner. 8. Admittedly, demand/ allotment letter was issued pursuant to draw held on 13.02.2002 and petitioner approached the DDA on 04.05.2006 after a gap of four years, hence, would be liable to pay interest @12% as per the office order dated 25.02.2005 . In spite of policy being formulated by the DDA, it is shocking as to why the petitioners has been compelled to approach this court in the year 2007. Perusal of order-sheets also reveals that consistently from 14.01.2008 time was sought to file counter affidavit, however, it was filed only on 03.07.2009. The matter is fully covered by the policy of the DDA and also fully covered by various decisions rendered by this Court from time to time. Instead of DDA calling upon the petitioner and handing over demand/allotment letter, the DDA has waited for this court to pass the order. Accordingly petition is W.P.(C) 5429/2007 3/4 allowed. Petitioner is liable to pay interest upto the period from 04.05.2006 to six months thereafter, as this can be treated reasonable period spent by the DDA to process the case of the petitioner i.e. November, 2006. 9. Petition stands disposed of, in above terms and costs is quantified at Rs.15,000/- be paid to the petitioner. G.S. SISTANI, J. February 18, 2010 'ssn’ W.P.(C) 5429/2007 4/4