Ram Swaroop Chauhan vs State of Rajasthan and Others

Alok Sharma

This petition has been filed challenging the order dated 12.01.2012, passed by the Director, Department of Local Self Government, Jaipur whereby on reconsideration of the petitioner''s application for revival of the allotment of two plots i.e. E-60 and E-65 each measuring 10X10 ft. (which had been earlier allotted and subsequently cancelled) has been dismissed. The facts of the case are that vide notice dated 01.11.1983, the Executive Officer, Municipal Board, Bundi informed the petitioner''s father Moti Lal (now deceased) that he had been allotted plot Nos. E-60 and E-65 ad measuring 10X10 ft. through lottery system on 22.10.1983 and payment of Rs. 7,500/- had to be made in respect of each allotted plots. As the petitioner has already deposited Rs. 2,500/- each for the allotted plots, he was required to deposit a further amount of Rs. 5,000/- in respect of the plots within a period of 30 days failing which the allotment made to the petitioner''s father was liable to be cancelled. It appears that the petitioner''s father was not satisfied with the sitement of the plots allotted and requested the Municipal Board, Bundi to change the sitement to suit his requirements. Instead of complying with the orders of allotment dated 22.10.1983 and make requisite outstanding payments, Moti Lal the allottee now deceased and herein represented by his Son Ram Swaroop Chouhan laid a civil suit for permanent injunction against the Municipal Board, Bundi on 21.12.1983. The said suit however abated under the order of the concerned civil court on 03.05.1994 due to Moti Lal having expired and his LRs not having brought on record within time. An appeal against the order of dismissal of the suit dated 03.05.1994 filed by the petitioner was also dismissed on 21.02.1998.

After dismissal of the civil misc. appeal, the petitioner approached the Municipal Board, Bundi as well as the Director, Department of Local Self Government as also the Additional Director, Department of Local Self Government who appear to have vide letter dated 10.11.1998 required the Municipal Board, Bundi to reconsider the re-allotment of plots earlier cancelled to the petitioner. The Municipal Board, Bundi however did not think it proper to take any action for revival/re-allotment of the plots already cancelled on failure of the petitioner''s father to comply with the condition of the allotment order dated 22.10.1983 and ultimately no action was taken.

Thereupon, the petitioner filed a writ petition No. 9982/2010 before this Court. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court under its order dated 28.07.2010 with a direction to the respondent No. 1, Director, Department of Local Self Government to decide the application of the petitioner on the revival of the cancelled plots within a period of one month. In pursuance to the order dated 28.07.2010 passed by this Court in SBCWP No. 9982/2010, the matter was considered by the Director, Department of Local Self Government and the application for revival of allotment of plot Nos. E-60 and E-65 or allotment of two alternate plots of similar size in lieu thereof has been dismissed by his order dated 12.02.2012.

Heard the counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order as also the writ petition.

From the perusal of the impugned order dated 12.01.2012, it is evident that the allotment was made to the petitioner''s father Moti Lal through a lottery and he having already deposited Rs. 2,500/- for each of the allotted plots was required to deposit the reminder amount of Rs. 5,000/- in respect of each plots allotted within the notified period. On the failure of the petitioner''s father to make the deposits as required under the condition of allotment, notices came to be issued on 01.11.1983, 01.12.1983, 19.01.1984 & 18.02.1984 for the deposit of the reminder amount of Rs. 5,000/- in respect of each of the two plots allotted and yet the deposits were not so made and instead Moti Lal proceeded to lay a civil suit seeking permanent injunction against the Municipal Board, Bundi. Consequently, on 18.02.1984, a notice was issued to the erstwhile allottee Moti Lal asking him to show cause as to why the allotment of the plots made not be cancelled and his advanced amount not be forfeited. Yet no deposit was made again by the petitioner''s father. Further under the Rajasthan Improvement Trust (Disposal of Urban Land) Rules, 1974, the governing statute it was also imperative that the amounts be deposited as due in respect of allotments made within a period of 30 days from the date notified failing which the consequence of cancellation is to follow. The petitioner''s father Moti Lal did not deposit the amount due in respect of allotment of two plots in spite of notices sent repeatedly and consequently, the allotment stood cancelled. It would be important to note that the petitioner''s father died on or about 02.09.1984. Thereafter the petitioner has sought to agitate the case of the alleged wrongful cancellation of the plots on the ground of purported discrimination inasmuch it is submitted that as late as 2nd of June, 1995 plots have been reallotted to one Bajrang Singh Panthi S/o Mohan Singh Panthi while his request for revival of plots allotted/re-allotment has gone abegging.

Having considered the contention of the counsel for the petitioner, I am of the considered view that a random allotment to one Bajrang Singh Panthi allegedly made on 02.06.1995 does not make out any case for the petitioner. The case of the petitioner has to be considered in the factual matrix relevant thereto. On the basis of the factual matrix of the petitioner''s case as detailed hereinabove, it is apparent that the petitioner''s father was derelict in his obligation under the Rules of 1974 and the condition of the allotment to make payment of the outstanding amount and continued to be negligent in spite of repeated notices for the deposit of outstanding amount sent by the Municipal Corporation, Bundi. In these circumstances, nothing erroneous, illegal or arbitrary can be attributed to the cancellation of the plots allotted to the petitioner''s father Moti Lal.

Further, the civil suit filed by the petitioner''s of abatement as late as 03.05.1994 apparently owing to negligence of the petitioner in pursuing the suit following his father''s death. The petitioner''s father had no reasonable cause for not complying with the conditions of the allotment and the statutory rules with regard to deposit of the reminder amount towards the consideration of the plots allotted. A case of invidious discrimination against the petitioner vis a vis Bajrang Singh Panthi cannot be made out as the necessary facts to put the case of the petitioner at par with Bajrang Singh Panthi have not been pleaded. Consequently, I find no force in the present petition and the same is dismissed.