LAWS(GJH)-1997-5-4

BECHARBHAI V PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On May 05, 1997
Becharbhai V Patel Appellant
V/S
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed by one Becharbhai V. Patel for issuing a mandamus to the respondents to allot land to the petitioner on Saputara Hill Station and to treat the petitioner on par with other persons who have been allotted land on Saputara Hill Station on the basis of the Government Resolution of 1970.

(2.) A few facts in the present petition may be noted. An application was moved by the petitioner, describing himself as organizer of Divya Land Development Corporation for allotment of land to the proposed society named as Preyas Co-operative Housing Society Limited, Saputara, District Dang for the purpose of constructing row houses and bungalows therein. As the name of Corporation suggests, the petitioner is engaged in business of construction of buildings. The application was for an estimated land admeasuring 12000 to 15000 sq. yards without specifying the exact plot of land or exact measure or class of plot in respect of which allotment was sought. When the allotment application was made Government Resolution of 1970 Annexure-A was in force providing procedure for allotment of plots of various categories. The Collector acknowledging the receipt of application dated 23-12-1982 arid required certain information about the existing construction which the Housing Society might be having along with its plan and requested that only thereafter a proper application along with the earnest money may be made. The petitioner in his reply dated 31-1-1983 pointed out four different plots of varying sizes in respect of which he was interested for allotment and by calculating the earnest money on that basis the petitioner filed an application along with National Savings Certificates worth Rs. 8,000/- dated 13-7-1983 as earnest money payable along with application.

(3.) Letter dated 13-7-1983 was acknowledged by the Collector vide his letter dated 27-7-1983. However, he enquired that when allotment is sought to be made for Housing Society whether the Housing Society has been registered or not. It appears that notwithstanding the enquiry, matter rested at this stage, inasmuch as the Housing Society in whose favour allotment was sought has not yet come into existence as a person. The proposed society as yet has not been registered. During this period the guidelines for allotment of land dated 10-12-1970 Annexure-A to the petition was replaced by Resolution dated 20-11-1991. The major change in the policy decision for the present purpose which is required to be noticed is that while under the guidelines of 1970 the Competent Authority was to consider the application for allotment individually, and in case of more than one applicant for the : same plot of land, he could determine the allotment of such plot by drawing lots or other method provided under the Resolution dated 20-11-1991. Under the new policy the allotment of land was to be made by holding public auction. At that end advertisement to allot the plots of land at Saputara Hill Station by holding public auction was issued vide Resolution dated 12-12-1991. Pursuant to change in policy order was made on 12-12-1991 by the Collector to refund earnest money deposited by the petitioner and ordering his application for allotment of land to be filed. In spite of the aforesaid Resolutions and : orders the petitioner made representation to the Government through correspondence to allot him land by considering his application under the old policy. The petitioner was communicated by letter dated 21-1-1993 by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Gujarat, Information and Broadcasting Department that the proposal made by him is not accepted by the Government. Last of the representations to which the petitioner makes a reference was made by him on 18-8-1993 and this petition was presented on 25-1-1994. Nothing has been placed on record except certain communication from the Secretary to the Chief Minister for approaching the appropriate department. The petitioner appears to have persisted with approaching no one below Chief Minister.