Devinder Singh vs Union Territory Administration, Chandigarh & Ors

Leave granted.

This appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 03.11.2014 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, by which the writ petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed.

The brief facts of the case are:-

The Chandigarh Administration has floated a scheme for allotment of residential plots to the persons pertaining to low income group in the year 1971. The appellant had made an application under the aforesaid housing scheme for 5 marla (125 sq. yards) vide application dated 25.01.1972 and deposited an amount of Rs.315/- as earnest money, being 10% of the total price of the plot.

The appellant intimated his change of address to the Chandigarh Administration. In first draw held in the year 1972, the appellant was unsuccessful.

The second draw was held in the year 1975 in which the appellant was successful with regard to plot No. 3504, Sector 38D, Chandigarh measuring 5 marlas. However, the appellant could not get intimation of allotment in his favour. The intimation was sent to the appellant by UPC. Another scheme was initiated by the Administration viz. Housing Board Scheme where the appellant got his deposit transferred but subsequently the appellant's amount was re-transferred in the Chandigarh Administration.

Another scheme was floated by Chandigarh Administration on 15.10.1979 for allotment of residential plots. The appellant was asked to give his consent for consideration of his name by the Chandigarh Administration in the year 1981. The appellant was also asked to deposit certain amount to make up his earlier deposit of earnest money as per the new scheme. In the year 1981, the appellant came to know that in fact the appellant was earlier successful in the draw of plots held in the year 1975 and that plot No.3504, Sector 38D, Chandigarh was allotted to him, which intimation he could not receive. The appellant after coming to know the said fact, filed a petition under Section 10(3) of the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952 and Rule 22 of the Chandigarh Lease Hold (Sites and Building) Rules, 1973 before the Chief Administrator, UT Chandigarh, which petition was allowed and the matter was referred to the State Officer on 31.01.1995. On 13.11.1998, the State Officer decided the case declining to allow the plot No.3504, Sector 38D, Chandigarh to the appellant.

The appellant, thereafter, filed a writ petition (CWP No. 7259 of 1999) in the High Court. In the writ petition, the appellant also filed an affidavit that plot No.3504, Sector 38D, Chandigarh is available for allotment to him. The High Court on 01.09.1999 issued notice to the respondent with an interim order that plot No.3504, Sector 38D, Chandigarh shall not be allotted to any other person. Counter affidavit was filed by the respondents and ultimately the writ petition was dismissed on 03.11.2014, against which judgment, this appeal has been filed.

When the matter was heard by this Court, on the query made to learned counsel for the respondents as to whether plot in question has been allotted to anyone or still available for allotment, the learned counsel appearing for the Administration has fairly, after obtaining instructions, submitted that plot No.3504, Sector 38D, Chandigarh is still vacant and has not been allotted to anyone.

Learned counsel for the parties also obtained instructions as to the current rate of allotment and we have been informed that as on date the rate of allotment of free hold plot by the Administration is Rs74,131/- per square yard.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

From the facts which have been brought on record, it is clear that the appellant was successful for allotment of the said plot in the year 1975 but due to non-receiving of the intimation, he could not complete the formalities for allotment by depositing the money. It has also come on the record that the intimation to the appellant was sent by UPC. There are statutory rules namely Chandigarh Lease Hold of Sites and Buildings Rules, 1973, which Rule provides for allotment procedure. Rule 8(3) provides for intimation of allotment to be sent by registered post, but in the present case no intimation was sent to the appellant by a registered post.

Rule 8(3) reads as follows:

"8. Lease by allotment, Procedure for :-

(3) When 10 per cent of the premium has been so tendered the Estate Officer shall, subject to such directions as may be issued by the Chief Administrator in this behalf, allot a site of the size applied for or a building of which particulars are given in the application and shall intimate, by registered post the number, sector, approximate area, premium and the rent of the site or building alloted to the applicant."

The plot in question, being still available for allotment, we are of the view that ends of justice be served in directing the respondents to make allotment of the plot to the appellant as per current rate of Rs.74,131/-, which we are informed is the price for free hold plot. The Administration shall complete necessary formalities for allotment of plot in question as a free hold plot to the appellant on the aforesaid amount as indicated above.

The civil appeal is allowed accordingly.