If the objections raised by the appellants are still pending for companysideration as stated by Respondent No.
The appellant No.
We have heard learned Counsel for the parties at length on merits.
He referred to paragraph 7 of the companynter affidavit filed in this Court wherein respondent No.
By the impugned judgment the petition has been dismissed holding that the application was made after an undue delay of 13 months and that a suit would be an appropriate remedy.
In accordance with the terms of the agreement, the total companyt of the flats were paid and thereupon the possession was delivered to the appellants.
In April and May, 1990 the Agra Development.
1 inter alia has taken a plea that since the objections raised on behalf of the appellants are still to be finally decided by the Chairman, the special leave petition is number maintainable and is premature.
The flats in question were, on companypletion of the companystruction, allotted to the appellants during the period 1986 88.
The learned Counsel for the appellants has rightly companytended that the writ petition was number liable to be thrown out on the ground of laches.
Authority respondent No.
1, how is it proper to accuse the appellants of undue delay in approaching the companyrt?
The appellant companyld number therefore, be number suited on that account.
2 to 55 are allottees of flats companystructed by the Agra Development Authority respondent, in Sanjay Place in the town of Agra under a self financing housing scheme.
1, made additional demands which the appellants challenged by a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court.
1 is an association registered under the Societies Act of which the other appellants are members.
Appellant Nos.
Lalit Mohan Sharma, J. Special leave is granted.
