IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : ALLOTMENT OF FLAT. W.P.(C) No.5180/2011. Decided on:

Transcription

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : ALLOTMENT OF FLAT W.P.(C) No.5180/2011 Decided on: IN THE MATTER OF PITAMBER DUTT Through : Mr. V. Sridhar Reddy, Adv.... Petitioner versus DDA AND ANR Through : Ms. Manika Tripathy Pandey, Adv.... Respondents CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HIMA KOHLI, J. (Oral) 1. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner praying inter alia for a series of reliefs, all of which pertain to the disposal cost of a LIG Flat bearing No.29-G, Type-I, Pocket A-2, Kondli Gharoli (Mayur Vihar Phase-III), Delhi, allotted by the respondent/dda to the petitioner in the year 1990 on hire purchase basis. W.P.(C) No.5180/2011 Page 1 of 6

2 2. It is pertinent to note that this is the second round of litigation initiated by the petitioner for seeking the same reliefs. The earlier writ petition filed by the petitioner registered as WP(C)No.11299/2009 entitled Pitamber Dutt vs. Delhi Development Authority, was disposed of vide order dated (Annexure P-14) in the following manner : 1. The additional affidavit of the DDA is taken on record. A copy thereof has been given to counsel for the Petitioner. 2. There are two sets of calculations, one given by the DDA and other by the Petitioner. These obviously do not tally. 3. It is not possible for this Court to determine the correctness of either of the calculations under Article 226 of the Constitution. Accordingly, it is directed that the Chief Financial Officer of the DDA will examine the respective claims and also give the Petitioner an opportunity of being heard on 18th April 2011 at 3.00 pm. He will communicate to the Petitioner the decision of the DDA within a further period of four weeks thereafter. If the amount, if any, as determined to be payable by the DDA is paid by the Petitioner within the time granted by the DDA for that purpose, an NOC will thereafter be issued by the DDA to the Petitioner. 4. The writ petition is disposed of. W.P.(C) No.5180/2011 Page 2 of 6

3 3. It is the contention of counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the aforesaid order dated , the petitioner appeared before the Financial Advisor (Housing), DDA along with his representation dated (wrongly typed out as dated ) (Annexure P-15) and explained his case. The grievance of the petitioner is that after the aforesaid hearing, he received a letter dated from the respondent/dda informing him that his request for refund, as set out in para 8 of the representation dated , could not be acceded to but there was no discussion of the calculations submitted by the petitioner. Thereafter, the present petition has been filed by the petitioner, yet again calling upon the Court to determine the correctness of the calculations submitted by him. As noted above, similar relief, as sought in the present petition, was prayed for by the petitioner in the earlier writ petition, but the same was turned down vide order dated , with the observation that it is not possible for the Court to determine the W.P.(C) No.5180/2011 Page 3 of 6

4 correctness of either of the calculations submitted by the parties under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The position remains the same even today. 4. In case the petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that the Chief Financial Officer of the respondent/dda did not examine and specifically deal with the calculations submitted by him, and thus did not really comply with the aforesaid order dated passed in the earlier writ petition, it was for the petitioner to have filed a contempt petition against the respondent/dda. However, a second round of proceedings for the same relief could not have been initiated by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. Be that as it may, having regard to the fact that a perusal of the letter dated addressed by the respondent/dda to the petitioner shows that the same is quite ambiguous as to the outcome of the meeting held on in the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, DDA, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition in limine with W.P.(C) No.5180/2011 Page 4 of 6

5 directions to respondent/dda to grant a fresh hearing to the petitioner before the aforesaid Officer. The petitioner is, therefore, directed to appear once again before the Chief Financial Officer of the respondent/dda on at 3.00 P.M. The Chief Financial Officer of the respondent/dda shall consider the representation dated (Annexure P-15) submitted by the petitioner and thereafter take a decision wherein the calculations as set out in the said representation shall be discussed, and if the same are found to be unacceptable for any reason, reasons therefor shall be indicated. In case any minutes of the meeting are drawn by the respondent/dda, then they shall be got duly signed from the petitioner on the very same day. The decision taken by the respondent/dda, shall be communicated to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of conclusion of submissions. 6. The petition is disposed of. W.P.(C) No.5180/2011 Page 5 of 6

6 Sd./- JANUARY 16, 2012 (HIMA KOHLI) JUDGE W.P.(C) No.5180/2011 Page 6 of 6