1. By this order I proceed to dispose of the preliminary objection raised by the respondent DDA to the maintainability of the present writ petition on the ground that the petitioners are guilty of approaching the Court with unclean hand, resorting to suppression, concealment and misstatement of material facts and abusing the process of the Court. It is also argued that the jurisdiction being exercised by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution being discretionary, on account of the aforesaid conduct of the petitioners, this Court should refuse to exercise its said jurisdiction in the matter and dismiss the writ petition without even going into the merits of the case.

2. The present writ petition has been preferred by 28 individuals against the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), respondent No.1 and Kangra Adarsh Cooperative Group Housing Society (respondent No.2) primarily praying for the reliefs that the respondent No.1 i.e. DDA should issue show cause notice, grant personal hearing to each of the petitioners and pass speaking, sealing cum demolition orders before proceeding with the demolition of the unauthorized constructions raised by them, in compliance of order dated 20.9.2004 in WP(C) No.3771/2002 titled as ‘Shri Sukh Ram Gangotia and Others versus DDA and others’ and in WP(C) No.3823/2002 titled as ‘Shri

K.P. Bhangalia and Others versus DDA and Others’. It is further prayed that directions be issued to the DDA to apply the same norms relating to addition/alteration as applied by the respondent in respect of flats constructed by the DDA, to flats constructed by a co-operative group housing society. It is prayed that respondent No.1 DDA be restrained from carrying out any demolition of additional constructions effected by the Petitioners without granting personal hearing to each of the Petitioners.

3. The petitioners state that they are all members of the respondent No.2 Society. They state that respondent No.2 upon allotment of land by the DDA constructed the flats which were allotted to its members. It is stated that as against sanctioned FAR of 150 the construction was done by utilizing FAR of only 86. The petitioners state that the flats were constructed on two floors

.i.e. ground floor and first floor and all the petitioners are owners of the flats on the first floor. Admittedly, some of the members of the respondent No.2 Society including the petitioners raised constructions on the roof of the flats

.i.e. above the first floor in the year 1995. It is stated that the ground floor allottees too raised additional construction in the front as well as in the back portion of their flats. The petitioners allege that the ground floor owners encroached upon the service lanes, covered the sewerage/water lines and obstructed the free movement/passage inside the respondent Society. The DDA issued a show cause notice on 31.07.1997 to the respondent Society to explain as to why action be not taken against its members for raising unauthorized construction under the Delhi Development Act. On 12.12.1997 the DDA passed an order of demolition/sealing of the flats.

.4. Respondent No.2 Society challenged the aforesaid order dated 12.12.1997 of the DDA before this Court by filing the WP(C) No.5666/1997. The said writ petition came up before the Court on 31.12.1997 and was disposed of on the same day by the following order: ‘CW 5666/97 and CM 10899/97 Mr. Ramdhan has put in appearance on behalf of the Respondent. It has been contended by Mr. Rohtagi that the Society at the initial stage when the flats were constructed utilized 86.23 FAR instead of 150, which was permissible at the relevant time. In any event, the construction which ahs been raised is

.without the sanction of the respondent authority. Mr. Rohtagi prays that the writ petition may be treated as representation by the petitioners. The respondent will hear the petitioners before passing the final order of sealing or demolition. The petitioners to prese