1
Court No. 1
Writ Petition No. 7415 (MB) of 2010
Km. Renu Bajpai
Vs.
Lucknow Development Authority.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kant, J.
Hon’ble Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.
Heard the counsel for the petitioner Sri Ganga Singh and Sri Anuj
Kudesia for the Lucknow Development Authority.
With the consent of both the counsel, we dispose of the writ petition
finally.
The petitioner was allotted a LIG D-Type House under the Hire
Purchase Scheme, with an estimated area of 60 square meters and estimated
cost of Rs. 2,57,700/ This was done on 11.6.2002 and on 12.6.2002,
allotment letter was issued.
The petitioner had deposited certain amount at the initial stages but
thereafter she committed default in making further deposits.
Notices were issued to the petitioner but they were also not
responded to, and, therefore, the Lucknow Development Authority
cancelled the allotment sometime in 2009.
Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Ganga Singh very fairly stated
that it is true, that default has been committed by the petitioner, because of
her meagre means to make the deposit and also because of misadvice given
by certain persons but the petitioner is prepared to make the entire deposit,
as may be disclosed by the Lucknow Development Authority, in four equal
quarterly instalments, as may be determined by the Vice Chairman, as the
amount appears to be large.
We are informed by Sri Anuj Kudesia that the allotment of the
petitioner has been cancelled and a notification has been issued for inviting
applications for allotment of the house in question but till date, allotment
has not been made in favour of any person.
Looking to the economic condition of the petitioner and the very
fact that she is ready and willing to make the payment of the amount due,
coupled with the fact that the house in question has not been allotted to any
person, we dispose of the writ petition finally, giving liberty to the petitioner
to make a representation to the Vice Chairman of the Lucknow
2
Development Authority, mentioning therein that she is ready and willing to
deposit the entire amount, which is disclosed to her by the Vice Chairman
and on such a representation being made, the Vice Chairman shall consider
the same sympathetically and shall disclose the amount which is actually
due for being paid by the petitioner. In view of the offer given by the
petitioner’s counsel, the Vice Chairman may require the petitioner to deposit
a certain amount at the initial stage and the rest of the amount may be
allowed to be deposited in four equal quarterly instalments, as may be fixed
by the Vice Chairman.
The representation shall be made by the petitioner within 15 days
and in case she fails to do so or commits default in complying with any of
the conditions of this order, the benefit of this order would not be available
to her and the respondent would be at liberty to take action accordingly.
Till the representation is decided, possession of the petitioner over
the house in question shall not be disturbed.
The petition is disposed of accordingly.
Dated: 4.8.2010
MFA