$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 19.01.2026 + W.P.(C) 7220/2012 SUPREME COOPERATIVE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD AND ANR .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Raj Panjwani, Sr Adv. with Mr.

Abhishek Puri Adv., Mr. Sahil Grewal Adv.

versus D.D.A. AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Arjun Pant, ASC with Ms Latika Malhotra, Adv. for R1 Mr. Anand Prakash, SC with Ms Varsha Arya Advocate for R2 CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH : JASMEET SINGH, J (Oral

1. This is a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following prayers:-

“a) Issue appropriate Writ, Order of Direction calling for the records of the case and quash and set aside the communication dt. 14.9.2012 (Annexure P) demanding composition fee;

b) Direct that composition fee will be levied by the DDA upto

31.3.1993 in terms of the policy in force on that date;

c) Direct that DDA/MCD will grant all consequential benefits like C & D Forms, completion certificate etc;

d) Allow the present Writ Petition with exemplary costs in favour of the Petitioners; and”

2. The brief facts are that the petitioner No. 1, a Cooperative House Building Society registered under the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 1971, consists of practicing lawyers. Pursuant to its application, on 03.05.1983, the respondent No. 1 i.e., Delhi Development Authority (“DDA”), allotted and handed over possession of 5 acres of land to the petitioner No. 1 society for construction of 300 flats for its members.

3. Due to failure on the part of members to pay up the call money the construction was carried out in two phases. In first phase, after construction of 215 flats a draw of lots was held for allotment of flats. However, the Registrar Cooperative Societies tried to cancel the draw of lots and the petitioner No. 1 society challenged the same. A Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.09.1990 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 2331/1990 held the draw of lots to be valid.

4. Thereafter, the petitioner No. 1 society made an application for Form „C‟ and „D‟ to the DDA in respect of 215 flats, however, the DDA did not grant the same on the ground that the construction was not complete at that time. As some members did not pay up the call money, the construction was delayed and the petitioner No. 1 society had to get the plans revalidated from time to time. During this time, vide letter dated 10.01.1992, DDA demanded payment of composition fee of Rs.5,56,462.50/- for the period upto 02.11.1991.

5. On 17.07.1992, in the second phase the petitioner No. 1 society completed construction of the remaining 85 flats and again applied for „C‟ and „D‟ forms from the DDA. The Municipal Corporation of Delhi completed assessment under Section 176 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, assessing balance 85 flats with effect from 01.04.1993.

6. During this period the petitioner No. 1 society got into disputes with the Contractor/Architect. Subsequently, arbitration was conducted and the resultant arbitration Award is under challenge before this Court.

7. The petitioner No. 1 society could not obtain „C‟ and „D‟ Forms and completion certificate due to objections raised by the DDA. The Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 10772/1996 vide order dated 09.05.1996 directed Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking to get the premises inspected and to provide permanent electric connection to the petitioner No. 1 society.

8. In the meanwhile the DDA vide letter dated 18.03.1996 raised a demand of Rs. 46,75,069.05/- including Rs. 44,51,700/- towards composition fee for the period upto 02.05.1996.

9. In December, 1997, the petitioner No. 1 society challenged the demand for composition fee by filing Writ Petition (C) No. 5616/1997. When the writ petition as heard for the first time on 19.12.1997, this Court granted stay on the operation of the demand letter dated 18.03.1996. The order of interim stay granted on

19.12.1997 was later made absolute vide order dated 25.08.1998