JUDGMENT

The short question that arises for consideration in these appeals filed by the statutory body constituted for constructing and providing houses is whether the High Court was justified, in peculiar facts and circumstances of these cases, to allow review applications and writ petitions filed by various allottees and direct the appellants to grant concession of 50% in profit and administrative charges due to delayed delivery of flats as the High Court in earlier writ petition had granted such benefit in respect of interest and penalty.

2. For proper appreciation of the controversy, few facts in brief are necessary to be mentioned. In a Scheme known as Self Financing Scheme, 1985 announced sometime in the month of October/November, 1984 the respondents were allotted flats in 1986 of different types in different income groups. But the possession could not be handed over as constructions were not complete. When possession was delivered the appellant demanded extra amount as the price had escalated in the mean time. It was challenged by the allottees as the amount demanded was arbitrary and the constructions too were incomplete. The writ petitions were decided in February, 1990. T