$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision : 15.01.2026 + W.P.(C) 6833/2013 VIJAY KUMAR BAHL ....Petitioner Through: Ms. Ujala Vishnoi and Mr. Randeep Singh, Advs.

versus DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY .....Respondent Through: Ms. Shobhana Takiar, SC 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 a writ in the nature of certiorari and mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction thereby directing the Respondent to produce the records pertaining to the Petitioner before this Hon'ble Court;

(b) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari and mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction thereby quashing the letter dated 10.6.2013 issued by the Respondent and to revive the registration of the Petitioner to its original number.

(c) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari and mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby directing the Respondent to include the name of the Petitioner in a draw of lots and to allot a MIG Flat in the same locality as allotted in the draw of lots held on 9.7.1994 to the Petitioner upon payment of demand by the Petitioner.”

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner registered himself under the New Pattern Registration Scheme-1979 floated by the respondent. The aforesaid housing scheme offered public to get themselves registered therein and own flats to be constructed by the respondent authority. The policy formulated three categories of registrants namely MIG, LIG and Janta depending on the income range of the registrants. The petitioner on 10.09.1979 registered himself under the MIG category, by paying the requisite fee of Rs. 4,500/- as the registration amount. The respondent thereafter issued a deposit receipt and a Certificate of Registration.

3. Under the said Registration Form, there were two columns for address i.e. one for residential address and another was for occupational address. The petitioner in the column for residential address filled up his address as “H.No.35/C, MIG Flats, Ph-III, Pkt.-C, Ashok Vihar, New Delhi- 110052” and in the occupational address column gave his business address as “1/27, Nicholson Road, Kashmere Gate, Delhi-6”. The deposit receipt dated 10.09.1979 provided by the respondent mentioned the occupational address of the petitioner and the Certificate of Registration bearing registration No. 6853, dated 28.03.1980 mentioned the residential address of the petitioner. Thereafter, in 1980, the respondent authority issued a letter to the petitioner, addressed at his occupational address, instructing him to collect the documents.

4. In pursuance of the draw of lots conducted, the petitioner was issued a demand letter dated 09.07.1994 at his residential address, which was returned as undelivered because the petitioner had vacated the said residential property. In 1997, for the first time vide letter dated 15.07.1997 the petitioner informed the respondent regarding the change of his residential address from “H.No 35/C MIG Flats, Phase 3 Pocket-C-Ashok Vihar, Delhi- 52” to “ED-43-C, MIG Flats, Pkt.C, Ashok Vihar, Pitampura, Delhi”. Thereafter, the petitioner raised multiple representations before several authorities for change of residential address but to no avail. Though the letter dated 06.03.2000 mentioned the letter dated 15.07.1997, however, the letter of 15.07.1997 is not on record. Hence the first letter informing the respondent about the petitioner’s change of address filed before the Court is dated 06.03.2000. The letter dated 06.03.2000 reads as under:

5. The petitioner was informed by the respondent, subsequently, to make representation to the respondent for cancellation of his allotment. After several representations being made before several authorities, on

30.08.2012, the respondent instructed the petitioner to deposit ownership proof of his residential and t