C. K. Mahajan, J. ( 1 ) RULE. Petitioner s father registered for allotment of LIG flat with the respondent/ DDA under the Special Housing Registration Scheme, 1985 for Retired/retiring Public Servants in 1985. Draw of lots was held on the 14th December, 1988 and the petitioner s father was allotted third floor flat bearing No. 5-D, Mansarovar Park, Shahdara under LIG category. Allotment-cum-demand letter was to follow. ( 2 ) IT appears that when the petitioner s father went to see the site he found that the flat allotted to him was already in occupation of Delhi Police and a Police Post was already in existence there. Petitioner s father met the Minister for Housing, Vice-Chairman, DDA and other officers of the DDA. The respondent/dda allotted an alternative flat No. 480, Mansarovar Park, Shahdara at the same costs. The petitioner s father again went to see the site and he was shocked to learn that this flat also had already been allotted to some other person. He again met the Minister of Housing, Vice-Chairman and other officials of DDA and also made representations on 20. 10. 1989, 11. 11. 1989, 11. 5. 1990, 23. 8. 1990, 19. 2. 1991, 31. 3. 1991, 8. 7. 1991 and 25. 4. 1992. The petitioner s father died on 7. 11. 1992 waiting for an allotment. ( 3 ) THE petitioner submitted all relevant papers for transfer of registration/ mutation in his name. The petitioner received a letter dated 3. 7. 1997 from the respondent/dda stating that the DDA is prepared to include the name of the petitioner in the next general draw of lots at the current cost and intimation will be given if allotment is made. The petitioner filed a Civil Writ Petition No. 2002 of 1997 which was dismissed in default on 28. 5. 1998. Hence the present writ petition. ( 4 ) A show cause notice was issued and an interim order was passed by this Court directing the status quo to be maintained in respect of Flat No. 677, FF, Pocket-C, East of Loni Road, Delhi. Thereafter the learned Counsel for the respondent DDA took time for filing reply to show cause but till date no reply has been filed. Thereafter the learned Counsel for the respondent DDA took time for filing reply to show cause but till date no reply has been filed. ( 5 ) THIS is one of the several petitions filed by the allottees complaining of double allotment with the exception that in this case double allotment was made twice. This is yet another example of indifferent and callous approach of the respondent/dda. The officials of the DDA ensconced in their cozy chambers are committing blunders time and again not caring for the trouble and harassment caused to the allottees for no fault of their. A mistake committed once, though not condonable, could be attributed to indifferent callous approach of the officials concerned or computer error, but to repeat the same smacks of collusion, dishonesty and nepotism. Stern action, including suspension and dismissal be taken against officials found guilty. Focus of the authority should be on being helpful in solving the problems of the common man rather than creating hurdles and obstructions. ( 6 ) AS per the policy of the respondent/dda issued vide Resolution No. 144/ 93 the petitioner is entitled to an alternative flat at the same cost, same zone, same area and same floor. Following a judgment of this Court in Subhash Chander Chadha v. DDA, 72 (1998) DLT 413, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to allot flat No. 677, FF, Pocket-C, East of Lord Road, Delhi at the same costs at which the earlier flat was allotted to him in the draw of lots held on 14th December, 1988. The respondent is directed to issue demand-cum-allotment letter within four weeks and hand over the physical possession of the above flat on completion of usual formalities within two weeks. The petition is disposed of with costs. Costs are assessed at Rs. 7,500. 00. Writ Petition allowed with costs.