M. K. Gupta
The DDA is now misleading the applicants of its Housing Scheme 2008. The names of over 3200 applicants were not included in the housing draw which was held on 16th Dec. 2008, asserts Nimo Dhar, Director (PR) DDA. Reason, over 3200 applicants defaulted as either they submitted more than one application or did not submit copy of PAN Card etc.
Earlier, Dy. Director, EHS/LIG/MIG/SFS sent a letter dated 27th January, 2009 to the applicants stating “on scrutiny of data furnished in the application some doubts have been aroused about multiple application as the name of your spouse has matched with application No./ Form No.” ______ (form numbers were mentioned in the blank. The letter further directed the applicants to attend the DDA office along with indemnity bond and some other documents in original on or before 6.2.2009 for the verification the genuineness and eligibility for refund. Letter further states that in case of failure to attend the DDA, registration money will be forfeited.
That the DDA has concluded in advance that over 3200 applicants has submitted more than one application and debarred them from the draw about two month before the start of inquiry. Till date, the findings of this inquiry are not known to the public.
The aforesaid letter of the Deputy Director tried to also misled the applicants stating “Your name was included in the draw of lots held on 16.12.2008 and you have been declared unsuccessful” because now the Director has confirmed that their names were not included.
This is not the only example of misleading the applicants. Earlier, DDA misled the applicants on the issue of authenticity of software used in the draw. Informing M.K. Gupta on software, Mrs. Poonam Mathur, Director (System) said in her letter number 1011 dated 24.11.08 “The software is running successfully since many years and even checked by independent judges/ observers earlier many times including IT experts from IIT Delhi.” On the contrary, Ms. Veena Ish, Pr. Commr. (Systems) while answering about the “name of the independent agency from where the Software Program was tested” replied in her letter in letter No. 206 dated 27.2.2009 “no agency was involved for testing. The software was tested in-house.”
Now, how the DDA will compensate those applicants who have submitted only one application but were doubted of submitted more and their names were not included in the draw. Also, the question remains why the DDA has given wrong information initially on the inclusion of names in the draw and also about the authenticity of software. Central Information Commission will hear complaint of an applicant named M. K. Gupta against the contradictory information about software on 31st July, 2009.
M.K. Gupta offers for a public debate on the DDA Scam with DDA officials. He has taken up some other issues related to the scam disclosure of the internal inquiry report and alleged allotments of flats on an applicant named Hema Meena (form No. 229147 in 2006 and 894215 in 2008) in all the three previous schemes i.e. 2004, 2006 and 2008. On some of the issues, his appeals are pending before Central Information Commission.