Neeraj Tayal v. Directorate of Estates & Anr.

1. This order is in continuation ofyesterday's order.

2. Ms. Shobhana Mathew, Deputy Director (Estates) is present in person. She explains that the entire allotment process is computerized and for an allotment to be manually made, instructions will haveto be takenand which may take some time. She further states thatowing to computerization of the allotment process, the petitioner whose year of appointment is 2003 has become eligible for allotment, while before computerization, the appointees tillthe yearAugust, 1989 only were eligible forallotment.

3. It has been enquired from the petitioner whether the petitioner has applied online for flat No.D-4B which he now seeks. The petitioner in person states that the said flat is not shown as available for allotment till now. IV.R(C) 2821/2011 ' ofi 2011:DHC:17797

4. Ms. Shobhana Mathew, Deputy Director (Estates) has further explained that the options can be given online between 16"' to 24'^ ofevery month and the allotments are made on25^'' of each month unless delayed by one or two days.

5. The petitioner in person states that he has been applying every month after February, 2011 butno allotment has been made to him.

6. Ms. Shobhana Mathew states that the same may have happened owing to persons having higher priority than the petitioner having applied for the same flats for which the petitioner has applied and in which case they would have been given preference. It is further stated that the petitioner is also equally at fault for earlier applying for the non existent flat No.llD.

7. It is however admitted that the said non existent flat No.llD was shown on the computer system ofthe respondent as available for allotment, Ms. Shobhana Mathew states thatthe saidmistake has sincebeenrectified.

8. The petitioner states that owing to his family exigencies, he is interested in government accommodation atMayapuri only.

9. Since the petitioner had earlier been allotted a flat at Mayapuri and which turned out to be non existent and since the flat No.D-4B has till now not been shown as available on the system of the respondent and as such there could be no possibility of anybody else applying therefor, the respondents are directed to make allotment offlat No.D-4B to the petitioner without putting up the same as available on the system and to do all other things which may be required to be done in this regard within 30 days of today. The petitioner to comply with necessary formalities in this regard. Page 2 of[3] W.R(C) 2821/2011

10. Thepetition is disposed of. Noorder asto costs.