Stating that such unscrupulous acts and "gross abuse of process of law" must be dealt with a heavy hand, Justice V B Gupta also directed DDA to recover the punitive damages from the salaries of the delinquent officers, who have been pursuing "meritless and frivolous" litigation with the sole aim of "wasting the public exchequer".
The case relates to Sudershan Bhareja who had applied for LIG Rohini Residential Plotted Scheme, 1981 in which he was given a priority number but no allotment was made to him.
The flats were advertised to be of 'A' quality by DDA. Bhareja was allotted a flat in the scheme. When he went to see the flat, it was in dilapidated condition.
"It was clear from the conditions of the flat, that petitioner (DDA) was trying to write off old flats to the public in general at a higher price without making them aware of its year/date of construction. The same amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondent," Justice Gupta noted in the order.
More From This Section
The order was upheld by the State Commission as well.
But DDA chose to appeal before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, the top appellate authority deciding on consumer disputes.
Justice Gupta said there was no explanation at all from DDA as to why after collecting huge amount of money from the general public as registration fee etc, it did not take any steps for allotting plot or flat for more than 21 years.