Rajasthan Housing Board vs RAM SWAROOP MEENA , For the : None.

THIS appeal has been filed by the Rajasthan Housing Board and its Dy. Housing Commissioner against the order of the District Forum, Kota, dated 19.1.96 passed in complaint case No. 556/94. By the said order the District Forum, Kota directed the Opposite Parties to allot to the complainant house on hire cum purchase basis and to pay to the complainant compensation which was to be the difference between the cost amount of Rs. 87,871/ mentioned in the allotment letter Ex. 3 and the cost of the house which was applicable when house was allotted to the complainant earlier on 19.9.92. The District Forum further awarded to the complainant Rs. 1000/ as compensation for mental distress and agony. Aggrieved by this order, the Opposite Parties have filed this appeal. Appearance had been put on behalf of the complainant respondent on 26.2.97, but none has appeared for the complainant despite notice of today''s date. We have, therefore, heard the learned Counsel for the appellants and have gone through the record.

ADMITTEDLY the complainant had got himself registered for LIG category house on 22.12.97 on hire cum purchase basis. The complainant had deposited registration amount of Rs. 900/ for this purpose. On 18.3.82 a reservation letter was issued to the complainant requiring him to deposit seed money in two instalments of Rs. 1,150/ each respectively on 24.2.82 and 13.10.82. The complainant duly deposited the two instalments of seed money in time. It appears that on 25.7.85 an allotment letter was issued to the complainant allotting him house No. 5 C 4 at Mahaveer Nagar, Kota on hire cum purchase basis. However, by this allotment letter the complainant was required to deposit an amount of Rs. 2,795/ . According to the Opposite Parties, this amount was not deposited by the complainant. The office of the Housing Board at Kota, therefore, sent letter to the complainant on 6.1.86 informing him that he had not deposited the amount mentioned in the allotment letter. The second reminder was sent on 7.11.86 whereby the complainant was required to deposit the amount of Rs. 2,795/ within ten days failing. which it was mentioned that the allotment order will be cancelled. In this reminder dated 7.11.86, it was also mentioned that the complainant may deduct the amount of Rs. 1,150/ of the seed money which he had deposited and remit the balance amount of Rs. 1,645/ by a demand draft and thereafter a fresh allotment cum possession letter will be issued in favour of the complainant. It seems that since the complainant did not deposit the amount, allotment was cancelled. Subsequently the complainant made a representation to the Housing Board and it appears that the Chairman of the Rajasthan Housing Board directed for renewal of registration if the complainant deposited the amount in accordance with rules. Thereupon the complainant deposited an amount of Rs. 1000/ on 12.7.91 for renewal of the registration. The registration was renewed. Thereafter it appears that the Dy. Housing Commissioner D.C. Babel sent a letter to the complainant on 19.9.92 informing the complain ant that he had been allotted House No. 7 H 26 Mahaveer Nagar III, Kota in the District Allotment Committee meeting held on 31.3.92. How ever, no formal allotment letter was issued to the complainant with respect to House No. 7 H 26. However, on 19.11.92 by a letter sent by the Estate Manager, the complainant was informed that House No. 7 H 26 had already been allotted to some other allottee named Avinash and, there fore, the complainant would be allotted another house. Thereafter on 16.2.94 the complainant was allotted by the District Allotment Commit tee House No. 4 K 17. Then an allotment letter was issued to the complainant on 13.7.94 allot ting to him House No. 4 K 17 on outright sale basis and the complainant was required to de posit an amount of Rs. 87,871/ before taking possession. Thereafter the complainant filed the complaint before the District Forum on 25.7.94. After the filing of the complaint, the Housing Board issued another allotment letter dated 27.10.94 making allotment of House No. 4 K 17 on hire cum purchase basis. Who else will suffer except the Rajasthan Housing Board when its Chairman showed, undue favour to the complainant by renewing his registration despite non depositing of the amount demanded from the complainant in the allotment letter which had been issued on 25.7.85 to the complainant allotting him House No. 5 C 4. Admittedly the complainant had not deposited the amount which he was required to de posit as per allotment letter dated 25.7.85. Here also there was an error on the part of the Rajasthan Housing Board that in the allotment letter dated 25.7.85 an amount of Rs. 1150/ had been added with respect to seed money despite the fact that the complainant had already deposited the two instalments of seed money. The correct amount which should have been demanded from the complainant was only Rs. 1644.28. The office of the Housing Board itself realized this mistake and in the letter dated 7.11.86, it itself wrote to the complainant that he may deduct the amount of Rs. 1150/ of the seed money and deposit the balance amount of Rs. 1,645/ . This amount of Rs. 1,645/ was also not deposited by the complain ant. We wonder how the Chairman of the Rajasthan Housing Board could revive the registration in such circumstances.

Be that all as it may, the Chairman revived the registration and the complainant de posited the amount of Rs. 1000/ for reviving the registration. The Dy. Housing Commissioner Sh. D.C. Babel though that the Chairman wanted to favour the complainant and, therefore, he intimated to the complainant that the District Allotment Committee has allotted House No. 7 H 26 in Mahaveer Nagar to the complainant in the meeting held on 31.3.92. This letter of Sh. D.C. Babel led the complainant to believe that House No. 7 H 26 has been allotted to him by the District Allotment Committee. Soon this irresponsible act of Sh. D.C. Babel received a set back when it was found that the District Allotment Committee in its meeting held on 31.3.92 had allotted House No. 7 H 26 to some other person named Avinash.

THE matter did not end here. Despite showing favour to the complainant, the Housing Board issued another allotment letter on 13.7.94 to the complainant allotting him House No. 4 K 17. However, this allotment was not on hire cum purchase basis, but on outright sale basis. THE complainant, therefore, filed the complaint. THE Rajasthan Housing Board revised the allotment after the filing of the complaint on 27.10.94 and issued allotment letter on hire cum purchase basis. Naturally, therefore, the Dy. Housing Commissioner of the Rajasthan Housing Board at Kota by his own conduct rather misconduct, led the complainant to believe that he had been allotted House No. 7 H 26 by the District Allotment Committee on 31.3.92. In these circum stances, what error the District Forum, Kota committed when Dy. Housing Commissioner of the Rajasthan Housing Board was himself in forming, by going out of way, that the complain ant had been allotted House No. 7 H 26. The order of the District Forum, Kota is, therefore, correct. We will further direct that the loss which has been caused to the Rajasthan Housing Board shall be recovered by the Housing Board from Sh. D.C. Babel, the then Dy. Housing Commissioner.

CERTIFIED copy of the order will be sent to the respondent by post at the expense of the State Commission. Ordered accordingly. _______________