M. S. A. Siddiqui, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner got himself registered for allotment of MIG. flat under the Ambedkar Awas Yojna, 1989 floated by the respondent. In the month of November, 1996 the petitioner received the allotment-cum-demand letter informing him about allotment of flat No. 97, Sector 24 Pocket 23, Rohini, Delhi. The said letter of allotment also indicated that the total cost of the flat which was payable was Rs. 6,48,000. 00. The petitioner did not pay the disposal cost of the flat in terms of the letter of demand on the ground that essential services and basic facilities were not made available by the DDA and as such the flat was not habitable. Petitioner s further grievance is that the respondent arbitrarily cancelled the allotment of the flat vide letter dated 25. 7. 1997.

( 2 ) THE question is whether the petitioner can be allowed to withhold payment of price of the flat unless and until essential services and amenities have been made available. In K. Bhattacharjee v. DDA, 63 (1996) DLT 467 (DB) an identical question was raised for decision which was answered in negative and it was held that the letter of allotment issued by the DDA is an offer which the allottee may

Click Here to Read the rest of this document