ORDER

Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioners. No one is present for the Respondent.

2. Mr. Bhim Singh Deora, the Respondent / Complainant while he was in service as the Personal Assistant of the Deputy Speaker of the Rajasthan Vidhan Sabha applied for the allotment of a unit in the Jawahar Nagar Housing Project developed by the Rajasthan Housing Board, the Petitioner herein. His grievance was that he had applied on a payment of Rs.2,500/- as registration fee which was the pre-requisite deposit, yet the Rajasthan Housing Board did not fulfil it’s promise and consequently he filed a Complaint being Consumer Complaint No. 1032 of 2013 on 09.02.2011 alleging deficiency in service on the ground that no allotment of any house was made to him nor was the registration fee amount of Rs.2,500/- refunded. It was alleged that 100% of the said allotment were to be made to Government Servants and therefore he being eligible for the same was entitled to it.

3. The Rajasthan Housing Board contested the claim by alleging that the Complaint was highly barred by time inasmuch as the dispute of mid 70s allotment was sought to be raised after 35 years through a Consumer Complaint and was therefore barred by limitation.

4. On merits as well the Complaint was resisted on the ground that the Registration fee of Rs.2,500/- deposited was in relation to lower income group strata in 1973, but the registration stood cancelled as the said amount together with interest had been refunded to the Complainant amounting to Rs.3,237.50/-. Consequently there was no deficiency in service at all, and post cancellation, even otherwise the Complainant was not entitled for a lower income group allotment as he did not belong to the said category. The Complainant had alleged that he had moved an Application under Right to Information Act on 10.11.2009 that was replied to and it was further informed that the cancellation of the Registration had taken place way back in October, 1978. A reply also indicated the refund of the amount referred to above.

5. The Housing Board had furnished the information on the basis of a Register maintained as GRS of allotments of 1973 where the refund to the Complainant was registered at Serial No. 2388. The said Register was maintained for the category of lower income group deposits of Registration fee of a sum of Rs.2,500/-. The District Commission came to the conclusion that no documentary proof was filed in support of this contention of the Housing Board regarding refund and cancellation and therefore the Complainant would continue to be a consumer for the allotment of a lower income group house. By not allotting the same the Housing Board has committed a deficiency and accordingly directed vide Impugned Order dated 04.03.2014 to allot a house to the Complainant within a month in any of their schemes for lower income group on the same price as had been computed for the LIG unit in 1973. Further a sum of Rs.15,000/- was awarded as compensation and Rs.2,500/- as litigation cost.

6. This three Member decision of the District Commission was assailed by the Rajasthan Housing Board in First Appeal No. 579 of 2014 and the Complainant also filed First Appeal No. 317 of 2014 claiming that he should have been allotted a higher income group unit and not a LIG Unit.

7. Both the Appeals were decided by a common order dated 20.01.2015, dismissing the Appeal of the Housing Board and at the same time allowing the Appeal filed by the Complainant accepting his demand for a higher income group house on priority and the price to be realised was to be the same as realised from the last allottee of the year 1973. The compensation was increased from Rs.15,000 – Rs.50,000/- and the litigation cost to Rs.10,000/-. The Rajasthan Housing Board preferred this Revision Petition that was entertained on 07.05.2015 and an interim order was passed staying the execution proceedings to the following effect:—

“De hors, the outcome of the present revision petition, in th