KRISHNA RANI KAPOOR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner wants to have the cake and eat it too. She claims to have purchased property measuring 500 sq.yards situated at B-2/14, SafdarjanG EnclavE New DElhi through power of attorney from Smt.Sheila CowasJi to whom it was transferred by the original leaseholder Smt.Jamuna Bai. Later R-2 promulgated a policy for conversion of leasehold to free hold on terms and conditions laid down in the brochure in April, 1992 and fixed different conversion rates,

(2.) Petitioner also sought the benefit of this policy and applied for conversion on 30.6.1994. R-2 enforced the rate applicable to her category of property which she is contesting on the ground that it was unreasonable. Meanwhile her request for conversion stands granted and she has also paid the requisite charges at prescribed rate but her counsel still wants a decision on merits.

(3.) Petitioner complains of hostile discrimination. Her short case is that R-2 had fixed lower rate of Rs.22,000/- for 125 sq.yards in the neighbourhood property (B-2/108, Safdarjang Enclave) as against Rs.2,38,567/- for her 500 sq. yards property. This according to her was unreasonable because a higher rate was being applied to her property though it was located in the same area. She accordingly wants the rate to be revised and slashed down and the impugned portion of the policy to be reformulated. Her counsel Mr.Kapoor pressed in service Supreme Court Judgement in AIR 1986 SC 1444 (Rattan Arya Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and another) and to highlight that rate fixation was irrational and unreasonable. He also relied upon a judgment of this court in Federation of Ashok Vihar Residents welfare Association Vs. Union of India & Others 1994 (29) DRJ 473 to show that scheme was defective.