AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
With consent of the parties, the bunch of writ petitions
has been heard finally.
The petitioners submitted application for allotment of
plot/house/flat/ skeleton house with the Rajasthan Housing Board
(for short ''the Board''). They were given registration number and,
in few cases, even information about allotment on remaining
successful in the lottery. The registration/ allotment of plot/
house/ flat/ skeleton house was, however, cancelled subsequently
for want of ''Know Your Customer'' (for short ''KYC'') or default in
deposition of seed money. On furnishing the KYC or the required
amount, their registration/ allotment was restored. The Board
thereafter passed another order for cancellation of registration/
allotment in few cases and similar order could not be passed in
other cases due to interim order of this court.
The cancellation of registration/ allotment is precisely
in reference to Cabinet decision. The restoration of registration
and allotment of plot etc. prior to six months to the elections held
on 1.12.2013 were ordered to be cancelled and, pursuant to the
Cabinet decision, Rajasthan Housing Board passed order for
cancellation of registration/ allotment in many cases. The similar
order could not be passed in other cases due to interim order of
this court.
It is submitted that the Cabinet cannot give direction to
the Board for cancellation of registration/ allotment so revived in
exercise of the powers conferred under the Rajasthan Housing
Board Act. It is further submitted that if State Government can
give direction, it could have been to re-consider the cases where
revival of registration/ allotment of plot/ house/ flat/ skeleton
house etc has been made contrary to the policy. In view of above
also, impugned order of cancellation of registration/ allotment of
the house/ flat/ skeleton/ plot deserves to be set aside so as the
decision of the Cabinet. The Cabinet decision could have been
taken on political grounds. It is more so when cancellation of
registration/ allotment was made on petty issues like; for want of
KYC or delay/ default in payment of seed money etc thus Board
took proper decision to revive all such registrations/ allotments
earlier cancelled. Hence, registration/ allotment of plot/ house/
flat/ skeleton house may be maintained.
Learned Additional Advocate General Mr JM Saxena has
opposed the petitions. It is submitted that revival of registration/
allotment of plot/ flat/ house etc was made before Assembly
elections and otherwise contrary to the policy framed by the Board
on 6.8.2009 and 28.8.2012. As per the policy dated 28.8.2012,
revival of registration/ allotment plot/ flat/ house/ skeleton house
can be made if covered by paras 1 to 5. In para 6, discretion has
been given to the Chairman of the Board but while reviving
registration/ allotment of the plot/ house/ flat/ skeleton house, no
reason has been recorded by the Chairman thus matter was taken
up by the Cabinet. After proper scrutiny, a cautious decision was
taken to direct for cancellation. The Board cancelled registration/
allotment of the house/ flat etc. earlier revived for the reasons
given above. A detailed chart has been prepared and, after
making scrutiny of each case, impugned order was passed for
cancellation of registration and allotment of plot/ flat etc.
Accordingly, this court may not interfere in the impugned order. It
is felt that the Cabinet decision has been applied in all the cases
despite covered by the circular dated 28.8.2012 or there are cases
where justified reasons for revival exist, then, it may be remanded
to the Housing Board. It would make scrutiny again, that too,
after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. If a
case is found covered by the circular dated 28.8.2012 or 6.8.2009
then appropriate order would be passed and, otherwise, Chairman
of the Board may also exercise its power in an appropriate case.
I have considered the submissions of the parties and
perused the record.
The Rajasthan Housing Board called applications for
allotment of plot/ house/ flat/ skeleton etc. The petitioners
submitted applications. They were registered and, in few cases,
even information for allotment was also conveyed. The allotments
or registration were cancelled subsequently. It was revived,
however, it has again been cancelled in few cases and it could not
be done in other cases due to interim order of this court. The
Cabinet took a decision and directed Housing Board to cancel all
the registrations/ allotments revived within six months prior to
Assembly elections. In pursuance to the direction of the Cabinet,
registration/ allotment of plot/flat etc, so revived, were cancelled.
I find that scrutiny of each case to see whether it is
covered by the circular issued by the Board or there are deserving
cases where revival/ restoration of registration/ allotment can be
made by the Chairman of the Board in exercise of the powers,
has not been made. The opportunity of hearing to the petitioners
was also not given. When the registration/ allotment of house/
plot etc was revived then the Board was expected to provide an
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before a decision is taken
adverse to them.
In view of above, these writ petitions are disposed of
with remand of the case. The matter is sent back to the Rajasthan
Housing Board to consider each case. It would be in reference to
the circular dated 6.8.2009 and 28.8.2012 and if it is covered by
it, then the Board would be expected to maintain registration/
allotment of house/ flat/ plot/ skeleton house unless there are
strong reasons to deny it and, accordingly, they would withdraw
the order. The other cases would be considered in the light of the
power of the Chairman of the Board and, if it is found that
cancellation was made only on petty issues, the Board would be
expected to take proper decision to avoid discrimination. While
considering the cases, period in between earlier cancellation and
revival would also be taken note of. The decision aforesaid would
be taken after providing an opportunity of hearing to the
petitioner/s. If deserving case is not found for revival/ restoration
of registration/ allotment, then Board would pass a speaking
order. The petitioners would then be at liberty to take legal
recourse as per law. It is, however, made clear that till fresh order
is passed in favour or adverse to the petitioner/s, the house/ flat/
plot/ skeleton house for which allotment has been made or
registration was given to the petitioners, would not be alienated,
rather, the position, as is obtaining on the date of passing of the
interim order and the present status would be maintained by the
respondent-Housing Board.
With the aforesaid directions/ observations, all the writ
petitions are disposed of.
In view of disposal of all the writ petitions, all the
applications stand disposed of.
A copy of this judgment be placed in each connected
file.