ORDER

1. With the consent of parties, the matter is heard finally.

2. The instant writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 28.4.2016 (Annexure-P/1) passed by respondent No.3 and prays for the following reliefs:

"(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this writ petition.

(ii) The respondents may kindly restrained from dispossessing the petitioner from the house in question.

(iii) The impugned order Annexure-P/1 may kindly be set aside.

(iv) The respondents may kindly be directed to allow the petitinoer to deposit the amount as per their allotment letter and also be directed to execute a lease agreement in favour of the petitioner within the stipulated time.

(v) The cost of the petition may kindly be awarded.

(vi) The allotment of house No.A-62 in favour of Gandhrav Singh may kindly be set aside."

3. It is the case of the petitioner that she belonging to EWS category, was allotted house No.A-62 by respondent No.3 vide order dated 16.11.2004, pursuant to the application submitted by her on "first come, first served" basis in Apna Ghar Scheme at Shatabdipuram Colony, Gwalior Development Authority. In terms of the allotment order dated 16.11.2004, the total cost of the house in question was Rs.52,500/-, against which the petitioner deposited Rs.10,000/- towards registration charges at the relevant time.

4. According to the petitioner, for the first time, she was served with a notice dated 14.08.2012 issued by respondent No.3, whereby she was informed that the installment amount pursuant to the allotment order dated 16.11.2004 had not been paid, and she was called upon to deposit a sum of Rs.3,98,417/- as per the Board's decision of the Gwalior Development Authority dated 8.6.2012, i.e., the premium based on the rates prevalent on that date, failing which the allotment would stand cancelled.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that against the said communication dated 14.08.2012, the petitioner had approached this Court by way of filing a writ petition bearing W.P. No.6480/2012, which was disposed of vide order dated 14.9.2012 (Annexure-P/3), directing the respondents to afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner for redressal of her grievance and, till such time, the respondents were restrained from taking any coercive action against the petitioner.

6. Counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance to the aforesaid order passed by this Court, the petitioner appeared before the authorities. However, she was never informed regarding any decision requiring her to deposit the installment amount. Suddenly, the impugned order dated 28.4.2016 has been passed, whereby the petitioner has been informed that for non-deposit of the premium as well as the installment amount, the allotment made in her favour in the year 2004 stands cancelled vide order dated 7.5.2014. The application submitted by the petitioner seeking restoration of the allotment by payment of premium/ installment amount as contained in the initial allotment order, along with interest, was considered by the Board in its meeting dated 7.10.2014, subject to the condition that the premium/cost to be paid in terms of guidelines for the year 2014-15, time was granted to the petitioner until 14.6.2015. However, since no amount has been deposited, the allotment made in favour of the petitioner was cancelled.

7. Counsel appearing for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner, along with her son, approached the office of respondents on several occasions to deposit the installment/ premium amount, but they were informed that no deposit was required at that time and that she would be informed when payment became due.

8. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that respondents acted arbitrarily and illegally in calling upon the petitioner to make payment of the house in question on the basis of the prevalent guidelines for