ORDER Mohamed Anwar, J.—Heard both sides. 2. By this petition, Petitioner Chandrakanthamma prays to: (a) issue a writ of certiorari to quash Annexure-E the endorsement dated 7.10.1998 in No. BDA/ADM/DSIV/36/HBR/I/1998-99 issued by the Respondent-the Bangalore Development Authority; (b) issue a writ of mandamus directing the Bangalore Development Authority to convey the site allotted to the Petitioner vide allotment letter dated 27.12.1997 without insisting for payment of Rs. 2,33,200/- as stated in the endorsement Annexure-E; (c) pass such other order or orders or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity. 3. It is not in dispute that Petitioner is a homeless and siteless resident of Bangalore City. She was allotted a house site bearing No. 36 measuring 50' x 80' situated in HBR 1st Stage, 1st Block, Bangalore, by the Respondent-Bangalore Development Authority ('BDA' for short) under its allotment letter dated 14.11.1987 for the price of Rs. 85,000/- vide Annexure-A. Before that site was allotted to her, she had deposited Rs. 10,700/- with the BDA as initial deposit as required by it. By allotment letter vide Annexure-A dated 14.11.1987, she was required to pay the balance of Rs. 74,200/- towards the price of the said site within 90 days. She could not pay the same within the specified time. Therefore, about 10 years later, the allotment of the said site to Petitioner was cancelled by the BDA under its order dated 15.10.1997 vide Annexure-B. Thereafter, a representation was given by her to the Government requesting to restore the allotment of said house site to her by accepting the delayed payment of its value from her. On that representation, the Government was pleased to accept the Petitioner's request to condone the delay in payment of the site value and restore its allotment to her. Accordingly, a letter dated 10.12.1997 bearing No. UDA.817.BLA.97 vide Annexure-R1 was addressed to the BDA to allot the said site to her in accordance with the terms stated therein. Since the contents of Annexure-R1 letter are relevant for consideration of reliefs in the petition, it is reproduced below: - KANNADA MATTER - 4. Accordingly, a letter dated 10.12.1997 bearing No. UDA.817.BLA.97 vide Annexure-R1 was addressed to the BDA to allot the said site to her in accordance with the terms stated therein. Since the contents of Annexure-R1 letter are relevant for consideration of reliefs in the petition, it is reproduced below: - KANNADA MATTER - 4. What is stated in Annexure-R1 is that the BDA may proceed to allot the said site to Petitioner by collecting its prevailing sital value or to collect the value thereof in terms of Rule 13(1) of the Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1984 ('the Rules' for short) together with 21% interest thereon payable till the date of payment of the price thereof, whichever is higher. Admittedly, thereafter, an amount of Rs. 2,40,000/- was paid by Petitioner to the Bangalore Development Authority through Bank Demand Draft bearing No. 227706, dated 2.9.1998. Thereafter, she was issued with an endorsement per Annexure-E, dated 7.10.1988 of the Bangalore Development Authority calling upon her to make further payment of Rs. 2,33,200/-, thereby asking her to pay the present prevailing market price for the said site at Rs. 4,84,000/-. Aggrieved by Bangalore Development Authority's endorsement at Annexure-E, the Petitioner has approached this Court seeking its quashment and for further reliefs as indicated above. 5. It could be seen from the Government's letter at Annexure-R1 that the Bangalore Development Authority was asked by the Government to allot the said site to Petitioner by collecting from her either the prevailing price for the said site as on the date of restoration of its allotment under Annexure-E dated 7.10.1988 or the original price for the said site at Rs. 85,000/- indicated in Annexure-A allotment letter dated 14.11.1987, together with 21% interest per annum thereon whichever is higher. The grievance of the Petitioner is that the exercise of option on the part of the Bangalore Development Authority to demand the prevailing price from her is arbitrary and wholly unconscionable as also legally not sustainable. Her further contention is that the just and reasonable value of the site that could be collected from her by the Bangalore Development Authority is its said original price at Rs. 85,000/- together with 21% interest thereon. 6. Her further contention is that the just and reasonable value of the site that could be collected from her by the Bangalore Development Authority is its said original price at Rs. 85,000/- together with 21% interest thereon. 6. I find sufficient legal force and weight in the submission of Petitioner's learned Counsel Sri T.S. Amarakumar since it enjoys ample support of the material provision contained in the relevant Rule 13(1) of the Rules. The material portions of Rule 13(1) are extracted below: 13. Conditions of allotment and sale of site.-The allotment of a site under these rules shall be subject to the following conditions: (1) The allottee shall within a period of ninety days from the date of receipt of notice of allotment, pay to the Authority the balance sital value deducting the initial deposit. If the said value is not paid within a period of ninety days, the Authority shall, on application of the allottee, extend the time for payment for a further period not exceeding two hundred and ten days and the allottee shall pay in addition, interest at the rate of eighteen per cent on the said amount for the first sixty days of the extended period and at the rate of twenty one per cent for the next hundred and fifty days of the extended period. If the amount is not paid within such extended period also, the registration fee shall be liable to be forfeited and the allotment cancelled without prior intimation: Provided.... Provided further that Government may, on application of the allottee and for reasons to be recorded in writing extend the period specified under this sub-rule till such time as it deems fit and the allottee shall pay in addition to the balance sital value interest at the rate of twentyone per cent on such balance sital value in respect of the period so extended in addition to the interest payable for the period of two hundred and ten days extended by the Authority. (emphasis laid) 7. (emphasis laid) 7. A plain reading of second proviso to Rule 13(1) makes it clear that the Government is sufficiently empowered by this provision to condone the delay on the part of the allottee in making payment of the price of an allotted site, on condition that the allottee shall pay in addition to the balance of sital value with interest at the rate of 21% per annum thereon for the period so extended in addition to the interest payable for the period of two hundred and ten days extended by the Bangalore Development Authority under Sub-rule (1) of Rule 13. No further power is given either to the Government or the Bangalore Development Authority under the relevant provisions of Rule 13 to demand or claim from such a defaulting allottee, in the alternative, the prevailing market price. Therefore, the demand of the Bangalore Development Authority in the instant case from the Petitioner to pay the prevailing sital value as on the date of restoration of site allotment is unsustainable. The Bangalore Development Authority is entitled to collect and receive from the Petitioner only the balance of original sital value i.e., Rs. 74,200/- together with the rate of interest for the period as stipulated in second proviso to Rule 13(1). Therefore, the petition deserves to be allowed as prayed. 8. It was submitted by Petitioner's learned Counsel Mr. Amarakumar that in compliance with the interim order dated 1.4.1999 passed herein, whole of the amount as demanded by Bangalore Development Authority under Annexure-E i.e., Rs. 4,74,000/-, in addition to the said initial deposit of Rs. 10,000/-, has been paid by the Petitioner to the Bangalore Development Authority, subject to the final order to be passed in this petition. The total amount, including the interest at the said rate which becomes payable by the Petitioner in terms of this proviso, is furnished at Rs. 2,73,417/- in the memo filed by the learned Counsel for Respondent-Bangalore Development Authority, Sri K.V. Narasimha. This figure of amount is accepted by the Petitioner's Counsel as correct. 9. For the reasons aforesaid, the petition is allowed. The impugned order under endorsement Annexure-E bearing No. BDA/ADM/DSIV/36/HBR I/I/1998-99, dated 7.10.1998 of Respondent is quashed. The Respondent is directed to accept and collect from the Petitioner the total sital value at Rs. This figure of amount is accepted by the Petitioner's Counsel as correct. 9. For the reasons aforesaid, the petition is allowed. The impugned order under endorsement Annexure-E bearing No. BDA/ADM/DSIV/36/HBR I/I/1998-99, dated 7.10.1998 of Respondent is quashed. The Respondent is directed to accept and collect from the Petitioner the total sital value at Rs. 2,73,417/- only, payable for the site that has been allotted to her under its allotment order vide Annexure-A bearing No. 1315/HBR I Stage/2C 36/1987-88, dated 14.11.1987. The Petitioner is entitled to refund of the excess amount that has been paid by her to the Bangalore Development Authority in this regard and the same shall be returned forthwith to her by the Respondent. Respondent shall also execute the necessary conveyance and other deeds/documents in favour of Petitioner in accordance with the Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of Sites) Rules, 1984 within one month from the date of communication of this order towards conveying the possession and ownership of the said site to her.