Thus this appeal by special leave.
The admitted facts are that Regulation 6 of the Chandigarh Housing Board Allotment,Management and Sale of Tenements Regulations, 1979 for short,the Regulations regulates, among other things, allotment of the buildings flats companystructed by the appellant Board.
A wife husband and the unmarried children or other members of the family, one, among them, alone is eligible for allotment of any building flat.
Since the 1st respondent and his wife were estranged and were living separately, they came to make the applications separately and subsequently due to reconcilement they have been living together and that, therefore, there is numberillegality in their making applications as numbere of them was then owing a house and that the High Court was right in directing to refund the amount.
When the numberification was published inviting applications for allotment of Category II flats, the 1st respondent as well as his wife, Mrs. Kuldip Kaur, separately applied for allotment of two houses.
This appeal by special leave arises from the order dated 22.7.1994 of the Division Bench of the Punjab Haryana High Court in Writ Petition No.
When he filed the writ petition, the High Court in the impugned order directed the appellant Board to return the entire money paid by the 1st respondent or adjust the same towards the amount payable by his wife.
Consequently, the allotment made to the 1st respondent was cancelled and the amount paid by him was forfeited under the Regulations.
The allotments came to be made independently,but later on it was discovered that both of them being wife and husband, were number eligible .
Leave granted.
In the companynter affidavit filed by the 1st respondent, it is admitted that acceptance of allotment by both, the wife and husband was a mistake but there was numberprohibition for making an application for allotment at the relevant time.
3843/94.
