The court emphasized that the failure to communicate a stay order rendered the DDA's actions arbitrary, upholding the petitioner's continuous readiness and willingness to complete the contract.

JUDGMENT

Sachin Datta, J.

W.P.(C) 7084/2021 and C.M. Appl. No. 22374/2021 (for stay)

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs:

"a) Issue a writ/order or direction quashing the order dated 08.06.2021 passed by Mr. S. K. Meena, Director (Residential Land) DDA;

b) Direct the Respondents to restore the allotment of the plot bearing no. 31, Block E2, Sector-7 Rohini-110085 to the Petitioner"

2. The factual background in the context of which the present petition has been filed is summarized hereunder:

(i) An auction was conducted by the respondents/DDA on 24.04.2019, for allotment of residential plot bearing no. 31, Block E2, Sector-7, Rohini, Delhi-110085,measuring 99.71 sq. mtrs., (hereinafter referred to as the subject plot) on "as is where basis" for the year 2018-2019. The auction purchaser/petitioner's bid of Rs.2,00,37,677/- was accepted by the respondents on 19.06.2019, being the H1 bidder, which was approximately thrice the reserve price of Rs. 69,87,677/-, and the Letter of Intent (hereinafter referred to as 'LOI') dated 19.06.2019 was issued by the DDA.

(ii) To participate in the aforesaid auction, the auction purchaser/petitioner had paid an amount of Rs. 3,49,384/- on 21.04.2019, as first stage Earnest Money Deposit (hereinafter referred to as 'EMD')/auction EMD i.e., 5% of reserve price. Thereafter, the petitioner remitted the processing fees of Rs.2,24,622/- on 21.06.2019, and an amount of Rs. 46,60,094/- on 27.06.2019, towards 20% EMD (second stage) in terms of the LOI.

(iii) After receiving the aforementioned amount i.e., the 25% of the bid premium/25% EMD, the respondents issued a demand-cum- allotment letter (hereinafter referred to as 'demand letter') dated 04.09.2019 to the petitioner for payment of the remaining balance amount of Rs. 1,50,28,358/- to the respondents/DDA, within a period of 90 days from the date of issuance of the said demand letter, as per Clause 2.4.4 of the 'Document for E-Auction (2018-2019) of Residential Properties on 'as is where is basis'. (hereinafter referred to as the 'E-Auction Document').

(iv) A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.11.2019, passed in W.P.(C) 11775/2019 titled as Naharpur Yuva Shakti RWA v. Union of India and Ors., directed the DDA to maintain status quo with regard to some plots of land in Sector-7, Rohini, which included the subject plot of the petitioner.

(v) The petitioner, unaware of the aforesaid interim order dated 08.11.2019 passed by this Court, sent a representation dated 21.11.2019 to the DDA requesting for an extension of time for payment of the balance 75% EMD demanded by DDA vide the aforesaid demand letter dated 04.09.2019.

(vi) Even though the DDA was in no position to hand over possession of the subject plot to the petitioner, in view of the aforesaid interim order dated 08.11.2019, the DDA did not inform the same to the petitioner.

(vii) The DDA sent a letter dated 02.12.2019 to the petitioner approving extension of time for payment of the balance amount (hereinafter referred to as the 'extension letter') and calling upon the petitioner to pay interest on the said amount at the rate of 10% per annum. The petitioner deposited Rs. 50,28,358/- in terms of the aforesaid extension letter on 02.12.2019 i.e., on the same date of receiving the aforesaid extension letter, and paid the balance EMD alongwith interest i.e., Rs. 68,00,000/- and Rs. 34,21,700/- on 06.02.2020 and 27.02.2020 respectively.

(viii) After making final payment towards the subject plot, on 03.03.2020, the petitioner submitted all the requisite documents for hand