PER JUSTICE J.M. MALIK

1.       Can an allottee of plot by virtue of a draw is entitled to ask for a change of plot as a matter of right?  Can an allottee of a plot in a draw force and compel Haryana Urban Development Authority (in short HUDA) to change his plot as per his choice?   Does the denial made by HUDA tantamounts to deficiency in service?

2.      Counsel for the petitioner heard.  Sh. Rajender Kumar, the Complainant applied for allotment of a plot measuring 14 Marlas in Sector 18, Urban Estate, Panipat .  In the draw of lots the complainant came out successful and was allotted plot bearing NO. 1240, Sector-18, Urban Estate, Panipat vide letter dated 02.11.2006. The possession of the same

was offered to him on 23.03.2006.  However, the complainant did not accept the offer of possession. The complainant averred that his plot was located adjacent to a cotton mill due to which there is always pollution of air and sound as small pieces of cotton spread in the air and fall in the adjoining plots of the mill including the plot allotted to the complainant.  It was also requested that other plots were lying vacant and he should be allotted another plot. 

3.      The District Forum accepted the complaint. Aggrieved by that, HUDA approached the State Commission.  The State Commission observed:-

“In case the complainant was not satisfied with the allotment of the plot, in that eventuality he would not have deposited the residuary 15% amount of the tentative price of the plot by making the same as 25%.  The allotment of plots by HUDA

was through draw of lots and no pick and choose policy could be adopted.  It is the luck of the allottee as to which plot is allotted in draw of lots.  Sometimes in the draw of lots the allottee gets corner plot, sometimes in front of park or in the middle of the row and sometimes uneven plots are allotted as

per draw of lots.  The location of the cotton mill near complainant’s plot cannot be termed as any kind of deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties nor it gives a right to the complainant-consumer that he should be allotted a particular plot of his choice.”

4.      The order of the State Commission cannot be faulted.  The petitioner cannot be given the liberty to choose the plot of his own choice.  This plot was given to him by virtue of draw.  The petitioner has made a vain effort to make bricks without straw.  The Revision Petition is merit-less hence the same is dismissed.