ALLAHRAKHA RASULBHAI MANSURI Vs. VICE CHAIRMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner who was serving as Regional Manager and holding additional charge of Divisional Manager (GIDC), Rajkot in Super Class-I, Officer Category, with a prayer to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate, writ, order or direction to respondent to allot a residential plot to the petitioner at Gandhinagar in view of entitlement of the petitioner for allotment of such residential plot as per the policy of respondentCorporation prevailing in the year 2004.

(2.) When this petition was filed in 2006, the petitioner was on verge of superannuation after rendering about 36 years of service. In the year 1970, the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant and came to be promoted as Junior Officer in the year 1973 and further promotion was granted as Senior Officer in the year 1978 and with continuous good performance he was promoted as Assistant Junior Executive in the year 1985 and attained the position as an Officer in above category of Super Class-I. The petitioner has served with respondent-GIDC in various capacity and except one incident of imposition of minor penalty of fine of Rs.5,000/- no other punishment or any misconduct appear during entire service rendered by him. Even the above punishment of fine of Rs.5,000/- imposed under Section 40(a) (2) of GIDC (Staff) Regulation, 1963 was with regard to unsatisfactory performance of the petitioner as a representative of the department in departmental inquiry initiated against another employee who was also facing trivial charge of constructing common wall by combining two plots alloted to the employees.

(3.) As per resolution dated 4.4.2001 passed by Government of Gujarat, allotment of residential plot to its employee without holding any auction and on concessional rate was issued and adopting the very policy, GIDC also issued circular on 28.9.2004 and accordingly the petitioner applied for the allotment of the plot in prescribed formate and with scrutiny fees on 13.10.2004. In the above prescribed form declaration/undertaking, a query was to be answered about pending of any departmental inquiry, to which, the petitioner answered "No" but by way of abundant caution mentioned that it can be verified from the concerned department. Thereafter list of eligible candidates for allotment of plots by way of draw system was prepared and such draw took place on 30.8.2005 and minute book was prepared. However, name of the petitioner was not reflected in the official outcome and therefore, addressed various reminders to the authority and finally inquiry was made under the provisions of Right to Information Act and a reply was received from Regional Manager, GIDC, Ahmedabad, which was very vague and therefore, again details were asked for. Since proper reply was not given a legal notice was issued to the department and finally it appeared on record that in the list of 187 employees who had applied for the plots, found eligible, name of the petitioner was included but allotment was denied on the ground of pendency of inquiry.