Govinda Raju Y. vs Bangalore Development Authority

A.S. Bopanna, J.—The petitioner is before this Court assailing the show-cause notice dated 22.09.2003 (Annexure-B), the endorsement dated 14.02.2005 (Annexure-B1) and the impugned cancellation order dated 19.11.2003 (Annexure-J). In that view, the petitioner has also sought for issue of mandamus to consider the representation of the petitioner and complete the process of allotment of site No. 2341 measuring 9mts X 12mts vide allotment letter at Annexure-A by collecting the balance amount due to the respondent. The case of the petitioner is that he belongs to the category of Scheduled Caste and in that view the petitioner had sought for allotment of site measuring 9 X 12 meters. The respondent accordingly allotted site No. 2341 at Sir M. Vishveshwaraiah Layout, Block-II, Bangalore, to the petitioner. The allotment was made on 16.04.2003. Since the petitioner belongs to the Scheduled Caste category he was entitled to pay the amount within a period of three years as contemplated under Rule 13(1) of the Allotment Rules governing the respondent. Notwithstanding the said position, the respondents claim to have issued show-cause notice dated 22.09.2003 indicating that the allotment made in favour of the petitioner would be cancelled for non-payment of the amount. Subsequently, when the petitioner sought for completion of the transaction, the endorsement dated 14.02.2005 was issued wherein the request of the petitioner had been rejected. The petitioner is stated to have made representation seeking consideration of his case for allotment of the site. Since the same has not been considered, the petitioner is before this Court.

The respondents seek to sustain their action by referring to the show-cause notice dated 22.09.2003 which had been issued to the petitioner and they also contend that though action had been taken immediately thereafter the petitioner has not approached this Court and therefore, relief should be denied to the petitioner.

The fact that allotment was made to the petitioner and that he belongs to Scheduled Caste category is not seriously in dispute. The question for consideration is as to whether the respondent was justified in cancelling the allotment in the manner they have done. Further from the provisions contained in the Allotment Rules, the fact that the petitioner had the benefit of paying the balance amount within a period of three years cannot be in dispute. If that be the position, even if it is accepted that the show-cause notice dated 22.09.2013 was issued to the petitioner, the same is well within a period of three years and the respondent, in any event, could not have enforced upon the petitioner the said conclusion in the show-cause notice that the allotment would be cancelled since as on that date, the petitioner had time to pay the balance amount. Further, from the paper notification at Annexure-C, it would indicate that the respondent themselves had taken a decision to extend the time for payment in respect of such allotments.

Furthermore, similar question had arisen for consideration before this Court in W.P. No. 14164/2013 (BDA) disposed of on 06.09.2013 and W.P. No. 12845/2013 (BDA) disposed of on 22.08.2013 wherein similar questions relating to the allotment and the provisions for payment as contemplated under Rule 13(1) of the Allotment Rules had been considered and it was held that the cancellation could not have been made within a period of three years which is provided therein. Hence, the reasons indicated in the said order would be applicable to the instant case as well. Therefore, to the extent of the respondent having issued a show-cause notice and having indicated in the endorsement that the allotment has been cancelled cannot be accepted. Accordingly the show-cause notice dated 22.09.2003 (Annexure-B), the endorsement dated 14.02.2005 (Annexure-B1) and the impugned cancellation order dated 19.11.2003 (Annexure-J) stand quashed. A direction is issued to the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner in the same manner as directed by this Court in W.P. No. 14164/2013 (BDA) and W.P. No. 12845/2013 (BDA) in similar terms.

With the above directions, the petition stands disposed of.