HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY vs Pardeep Kumar

-THIS appeal has been directed by opposite party No. 1 against order dated 2. 5. 2001 passed by Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rewari (hereinafter to be referred as District Consumer Forum) vide which the complaint of respondent Pardeep Kumar (complainant) was accepted and cancellation of the plot was set aside and further the appellant was directed to issue letter of allotment to the respondent within one month.

BRIEFLY stated the facts are that respondent Pradeep Kumar had applied for allotment of plot under Economically Weaker Section (for short EWS) category as per terms and conditions mentioned in the brochure issued by the appellant measuring 3 Marlas in Sector-4, HUDA, Rewari. He had submitted application No. 17971 on 12. 4. 1999 in Punjab National Bank, Rewari branch along with demand draft worth Rs. 1,615. He was found eligible for allotment of plot under EWS category scheme and was registered as such for allotment of plot by draw of lots. The draw of lots under the said category was made on 2. 3. 2000 at Rewari and he was declared successful and allotted plot No. 1016, in Sector-4, Rewari. However, no allotment letter was issued to him. He approached several times the appellant for issuance of allotment letter but same was not issued on one pretext or the other. On the other hand, he was asked to submit documents which he had submitted. After protracted correspondence, appellant vide letter dated 7. 11. 2000 cancelled the plot. Alleging deficiency in service, complaint was filed and prayed for restoration of plot and further sought Rs. 50,000 as compensation for mental and physical agony besides Rs. 5,000 as litigation expenses.

Appellant as well as OP Nos. 2 and 3 (as mentioned in the complaint) contested the complaint and stated that respondent was allotted plot No. 1016, in Sector-4, Rewari under EWS category as he was declared successful in draw of lots but allotment letter was not issued to him as complaint was received that he was living in joint family and his income was exceeding Rs. 2,100 per month. Sh. Mukhtyar Singh, Dy. Superintendent was asked to enquire and submit proof of income of respondent.

PARTIES adduced their evidence by way of affidavits and produced documents. After hearing Counsel for the parties, District Consumer Forum found the cancellation of allotment of plot as illegal and set aside the same vide order dated 2. 5. 2001 and directed the appellant and other OPs as mentioned in the complaint to issue letter of allotment to the respondent within one month.

AGGRIEVED by the said order, OP No. 1 has filed the present appeal. We have heard Counsel for appellant Mrs. Suraksha Sharda, Mr. K. S. Malik, Advocate proxy for Mr. Sandeep Kumar Yadav, Advocate for respondent and carefully gone through the file. It is an admitted fact that respondent had applied for allotment of plot of 3 Marlas in Sector-4, HUDA, Rewari under EWS category and the same was allotted to him in draw of lots which was held on 2. 3. 2000 at Rewari. However, allotment letter was not issued and was withheld as in the meantime appellant received complaint against respondent that his income was more than Rs. 2,100 per month. Admittedly Mr. Mukhtyar Singh, Head Clerk/dy. Supdt. of Estate Officer, HUDA, Rewari had asked the respondent to send copy of the ration card and affidavit duly attested by Executive Magistrate regarding his monthly income. Accordingly respondent had submitted copy of the ration card along with affidavit regarding his income. The official of appellant had not called the complainant who had made complaint for recording his statement. He did not gather any evidence to prove that income of Pradeep Kumar was more than Rs. 2,100 per month. Once respondent had stated that his income was less than Rs. 2,100 per month, so, burden shifted to the appellant to prove that his income was more than Rs. 2,100 per month. For this purpose, proper inquiry should have been made and documentary evidence should have been produced to prove that his income exceeded Rs. 2,100 per month. Having not done so, order of cancellation of allotment of plot in favour of respondent cannot be sustained as the same is illegal.

WE concur with the reasoning given by the District Consumer Forum and hold that there is no force in the appeal. Consequently, it is dismissed.

COPIES of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. Appeal dismissed.