Research › Search › Judgment

Delhi High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 483 (DEL)

ANJU RAGTAH v. DDA

2009-04-23

SANJIV KHANNA

body2009
ORDER 1. Mr. Mittar Sain-husband of petitioner-Smt. Anju Ragtah was registered under the NPR Scheme vide registration No. 12225 for allotment of an MIG flat. 2. Mr. Mittar Sain expired on 24.2.1991. Till that date, DDA had not made any allotment. 3. On 17.2.1993 the petitioner as widow and legal heir of Mr. Mittar Sain wrote a letter to DDA for transfer/mutation of registration in her favour. She enclosed with the said letter death certificate of her late husband and Ration Card as proof of her new address as she was staying with her father. She also informed the DDA that all communication should be sent to her at the new address given by her i.e. 6/251, Geeta Colony, Delhi 31. Receipt of letter is not denied by DDA. The original of the letter has been filed in the Court wherein the stamp mark and acknowledgement mark is clearly visible. 4. Despite of the aforesaid letter, it appears that DDA did not carry out the transfer of registration or mutation. They also did not correct/amend the address for communication as given in the said letter. The stand taken by the DDA in the counter affidavit is that the petitioner did not file any documentary proof for change of address. It is however admitted that DDA never requested the petitioner to submit any documentary proof of change of address. On the other hand, it is a case of the petitioner that she along with letter dated 17.2.1993 had filed photocopy of the ration card of her father with whom she was residing after the death of her husband. The ration card had her new address. 5. In the draw of flats held on 30.7.2003, flat bearing No. 472, Sector-D, Pkt-A, third Floor at Shalimar Bagh was allotted under the registration number allotted to Mr. Mittar Sain, husband of the petitioner. The said allotment was on hire purchase basis. Demand cum allotment letter dated 25.9.2003 was issued in the name of Mr. Mittar Sain at 19/5, Old Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi and was received back with remarks "left without address". Even after receiving the said letter DDA did not examine their records and send letter to the petitioner who had earlier written letter dated 17.2.1993. Subsequently another call was sent in the name of Mr. Mittar Sain at 19/5, Old Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi and was received back with remarks "left without address". Even after receiving the said letter DDA did not examine their records and send letter to the petitioner who had earlier written letter dated 17.2.1993. Subsequently another call was sent in the name of Mr. Mittar Sain at his residential and occupational address and as no response was received, DDA cancelled the allotment on 23.11.2004. S. The petitioner attended the public hearing held in 2005 and came to know about the lapse on the part of DDA and failure to issue allotment letter in her name and at the correct address. She made representations dated 29.12.2005, 4.1.2006, 13.8.2008 and 13.10.2008 but without any positive response and thereupon she has filed the present petition. 6. The entire lapse and fault is of DDA. The petitioner had admittedly written letter on 17.2.2003 informing DDA about the death of her husband-Mr. Mittar Sain, requested for transfer of registration and informed DDA about the address where she was residing. It is apparent that even after the allotment letter was received back, DDA did not process the letter and make amendments and changes. Even if the petitioner was required to complete some formalities for the purpose of transfer/mutation of registration, DDA should have informed the petitioner after receiving the letter dated 17.2.1993. Without response from the respondent, the petitioner could not have presumed that any further formality or requirements are to be satisfied. The contention of the respondent that the petitioner is to be blamed and is responsible for the lapse is rejected. 7. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. The respondent-DDA will allot flat bearing No. 472, Sector-D, Pkt-A, third Floor at Shalimar Bagh to petitioner. In case the aforesaid flat has been allotted to the third person another similar flat will be allotted to the petitioner and if required by including her name in a mini draw of lots. In case no flat is available at Shalimar Bagh, the petitioner will be given option of allotment in the nearest area. The petitioner will be given benefit of wrong address policy. The petitioner is entitled to cost of Rs. 10,000/-, which will be reduced from the cost as mentioned in the demand-cum-allotment letter. Original letter dated 17.2.1993 will be returned to the petitioner. Writ petition is disposed of. Writ Petition disposed of.