ARJUN BALJEE Vs. BANGLORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has challenged in this writ petition the order dated 3-8-2005 as per Annexure-H by which the Bangalore Development Authority has cancelled the allotment of site.

(2.) In pursuance of the notification dated 17-9-2003 issued by the respondent-authority in Kannada Daily 'Vijaya Karnataka' inviting applications for allotment of residential sites in BSK 6th Stage Layout, the petitioner filed an application seeking for allotment of a site measuring 15 x 24 mtrs. Annexure R. 1 produced by the respondent is the copy of the application filed by the petitioner. A sum of Rs. 94,500/- was deposited along with the aforesaid application. The total value of the site was Rs. 7,56,000/-. On the basis of the aforesaid application, site bearing No. 1180 was allotted to the petitioner as per Annexure-B dated 1-2-2004. As per Annexure-C, No Objection was issued by the Bangalore Development Authority permitting him to offer the property allotted as a security for raising the loan to meet the cost of site allotted to him. As the said balance amount was not paid within the stipulated period, as per Annexure-D - a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner calling upon him to show-cause why cancellation should not be made. It appears in the meanwhile as per Annexure-E, petitioner deposited the balance amount. Thereafter they issued Annexure-F dated 17-6-2005 - another show cause notice to the petitioner informing him why his allotment should not be cancelled as he is not eligible in terms of age. On 8-7-2005, he sent a reply to the show-cause notice seeking for extension of time to submit his reply. Subsequently, as per Annexure-H, by the impugned endorsement the allotment was cancelled on the ground that he was not eligible to be granted site and he was granted site because of his non-mentioning of his date of birth in the application. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition.

(3.) After service of notice, the respondents have entered appearance and they have filed their statement of objections. They contend as per the principles of selection, applications for allotment of sites and reservation of sites contained in Rule 11 of the Bangalore Development Authority (Allotment of Site) Rules, 1984 (for short hereinafter referred to as The Rules), the respondent is duty-bound to give regard to the number of times the applicant had applied for allotment of a site as-well-as his age. Two attempts coupled with the age of the petitioner were the relevant criterion for deciding the allotment. The petitioner cannot find fault with the said approach of the respondent who applied the right principles for deciding the eligibility of the applicants. Though the applicant was a person who was not eligible, by mistake allotment was made. It was open to the authority to rectify the mistake as the petitioner had no right to get the allotment. They did not dispute other facts stated in the writ petition.