2018 (5) TMI 989 - HC - Indian Laws

Genuinity of petitioner - Allotment of flat to petitioner, wife of Late Sh. Gurdial Singh, who had applied for allotment of MIG flat under the New Pattern Registration Scheme, 1979 - It is the case of the petitioner that the non-allotment of the flat to the petitioner and withdrawal of the earlier decision on the basis that the case is not covered under the wrong address policy is absolutely illegal and without merit - whether the respondent was justified in withdrawing the earlier decision of allotting flat on the ground that the case does not fall under the wrong address policy ? Held that - the dispute is whether the identity of the petitioner is genuine; that she is the wife of original registrant and there was change of address / residence and duly informed to the respondent and the same has been properly / rightly recorded in the ration card, the only authenticated source of information. There was some doubt in the mind of the authorities, but doubt can be clarified if the relevant information was sought from the ration card authorities, who would have the relevant information, including the application submitted and other supporting documents. The only action respondent need to take is to verify the identity of the petitioner; the genuineness of the address on the ration card and the change to the present address as well - Accordingly, this Court is of the view that the petitioner shall file appropriate certificate from the ration card Authority related to the change of addresses (till the present address) and furnish a fresh affidavit on the lines already submitted to the respondent within eight weeks from today - petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Allotment of MIG flat under NPRS-79.
2. Change of address and registration transfer.
3. Non-allotment of flat and withdrawal of decision.
4. Discrepancies in documents and ration card.
5. Justification for withdrawal of allotment decision.

Issue 1: Allotment of MIG flat under NPRS-79
The petitioner's husband applied for an MIG flat under the NPRS-79 scheme. After his death, the petitioner sought to transfer the registration in her name. The respondent initially approved the transfer and allotted a flat, but later withdrew the decision, citing discrepancies in documents.

Issue 2: Change of address and registration transfer
The petitioner informed the respondent about the change of address after her husband's death. She submitted necessary documents, including a ration card with updated address. The respondent changed the registration in her name but later raised objections regarding the address change.

Issue 3: Non-allotment of flat and withdrawal of decision
The respondent canceled the allotment due to non-payment after sending demand letters to the old address. The petitioner contended that she did not receive the communication and approached the respondent for redressal. The respondent later approved the allotment under the "wrong address policy" but then withdrew the decision.

Issue 4: Discrepancies in documents and ration card
The respondent pointed out discrepancies in the documents submitted by the petitioner, including overwriting on the affidavit and similarities in ration card numbers for different addresses. The petitioner argued that the changes were made due to address updates within the same locality.

Issue 5: Justification for withdrawal of allotment decision
The main issue was whether the respondent was justified in withdrawing the allotment decision based on document discrepancies. The court emphasized the need to verify the petitioner's identity and address changes through the ration card authority. The court directed the petitioner to provide a certificate and fresh affidavit for verification, setting aside the earlier order and disposing of the petition without costs.