Battling odds to complete its Commonwealth Games projects on time,the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) has now earned the scorn of the National Consumer Commission,which has said not everything is as glitzy as the authority flaunts on its website. The Commission was further displeased that the DDA had not even cared to put up something as important as a Citizens Charter on its website. The worst that can happen to a public authority like the DDA is to pretend that all is well,when the rest of the world knows and thinks otherwise. We hope our observations will spur the DDA management to some meaningful systemic action to curb delays in areas which constitute its basic functions,though they may not be as glamorous or eye-catching as the large,high-visibility projects which are displayed on its website, said a Commission Bench headed by Justice R C Jain. The Commission was hearing an appeal by the DDA against the Delhi State Consumer Commissions 2008 order which had directed it to pay Rs 2 lakh in compensation,apart from Rs 3.31 lakh along with an interest of 12 per cent for six years. The state commission had passed the order on the petition of A S Kohli,who was not allotted a flat till 1998 despite his having deposited the money in 1992 as per the DDAs own directive. While Kohli died during the pendency of the case,his wife and sons fought the battle. DDA challenged the order in the National Commission,but after a delay of 205 days and with some intriguing reasons like delay in getting the copy of the order,preparing the demand draft and other systematic delays. When the Commission heard the appeal,it asked the DDA to affix responsibility of the officer behind for delays and narrate the entire movement of the file. While the junior-most officer of the department was made the scapegoat,the commission said every department concerned with movement of file was found to be afflicted with red-tapism and the reasons for the delay were unjustifiable. Justice Jain noted that the DDA must put its house in order because it affected thousands of common people looking for a roof over their heads. It is for the administrative head of the DDA or his delegates to look into matters which pertain to its core functions,fix responsibility for undue delays,take punitive action in appropriate cases and,most importantly,introduce systemic changes to minimise,if not eliminate altogether,such delays,because they adversely affect the interests of thousands of citizens who come to the DDA for purposes relating to a basic human need like housing. The Commission further noted that delay bred corruption and they had to deal with innumerable cases of unconscionable delays not only in cases of addressing peoples grievances but also in filing appeals. The senior management of the DDA does not appear to be interested in finding a lasting solution nor in taking to task persons who are responsible for perpetuating such delays. It is a sheer travesty of the process of a fact-finding inquiry that the DDA has sought to bury the matter by holding some junior functionary like an assistant responsible for the delay and letting him off with a mere warning. even by DDAs own finding,the said assistant was responsible for a delay of two months out of six, said Justice Jain while throwing out its appeal. Taking Their own sweet time48 days in procuring the copy of the order and sending it to the department concerned by the Deputy Director (Self Financing Schemes).35 days for selecting a panel lawyer.46 days taken by deputy director to sign the power of attorney and send details to the lawyer.The lawyer completed her task the same day and sent the file back to the deputy director35 days for sanctioning the appeal and sending it to the Accounts branch for getting the demand draft prepared.15 days to get the draft made and for the appeal to be filed.
