The revision petitioner is the son of the original complainant Smt. Batul. The matter pertains to application for allotment of site made by her husband in 1973. Allotment letters were reportedly issued in 1982 and again in 1986, but no further action took place due to non-payment of full price. 2. The case of the late Complainant before the District Forum was that her husband had been missing since 1995 and it was left to their son to subsequently pursue the matter with the Rajasthan Housing Board. The District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Jaipur, allowed the complaint with the following orders:-
By allowing the Complaint of the Complainant, it is hereby ordered that the Respondent shall allot a flat/house of similar size to the Complainant by adjusting the deposited amount and the interest payable thereon against the value of the allotted flat/house, and by charging the balance amount, if any, and hand over the possession of the flat/house to her any Scheme to be floated by Rajasthan Housing Board after today.” 3. Admittedly, this order was not challenged on behalf of the Complainant. The appeal of the respondent-Rajasthan Housing Board has been dismissed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in FA No.14 of 2009 on 23.01.2013. However, during pendency of the appeal, the Rajasthan Housing Board made an allotment of a plot in favour of Shri Mohd. Ismail Khan, son of the late Complainant. The appeal itself has been dismissed by the State Commission observing:-
“We have carefully considered the entire circumstances, after the demise of Betul, her son Mohammad Ismail Khan has not filed any application to make him party nor has he filed any cross appeal, in such circumstances, whatever both the parties have decided with mutual consent, it could not be challenged. Therefore, appeal of the Appellant is devoid of merit, which is hereby dismissed and decision taken by the parties with mutual consent are confirmed.”
4. This revision petition is now filed seeking a direction to Rajasthan Housing Board not to charge rates prevailing now. The prayer of the revision petitioner is to:-
“a) modify the impugned judgment/order dated 23.1.2013 passed by the Hon’ble State Commission, Circuit Bench No.2, Jaipur (Rajasthan) in First Appeal No.14 of 2009 and consequently direct the respondent Board to allot an alternative flat/house to the petitioner on the rates in the year 1982, i.e. the year in which the flat/house was originally allotted to the father of the petitioner, as per terms of original allotment alongwith original size and rates prevailing in the year 1982;”
5. Shri Madhurendra Kumar, counsel for the revision petitioner has been heard at length. He agrees that the order of the District Forum was clearly with reference to allotment in a future project and it has also made a provision for interest payable on the amount already deposited on behalf of the Complainant. This order, as already noted, was not challenged before the State Commission and has acquired finality qua the Complainant and those claiming through her. Subsequent action by Rajasthan Housing Board in the year 2012 is only in compliance of the direction of the District Forum and does not provide any new cause of action in the hands of the petitioner. Moreover, the petitioner, as observed by the State Commission, was not even a party to the proceedings which he has sought to challenge through this revision petition. 6. For the reasons above, I do not find any merit in this revision petition. The same is therefore, dismissed at the stage of admission. | 
