V LAKSHMI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY consent of both sides, the writ petition itself was taken up for final disposal.

(2.) PRAYER in the writ petition is to quash the order dated 22.1.2004 issued by the first respondent and direct the respondents 1 and 2 to restore the allotment made in favour of the petitioner in the year 1988.

(3.) IN the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent it is stated that the petitioner suppressed the fact of having an allotment in favour of her husband at the time of submission of application and the petitioner also gave a declaration empowering the Board to cancel the allotment, if any suppression is found subsequently. The plot in favour of petitioner's husband was allotted in the year 1980 and the sale deed was executed in his favour on 20.10.1989. The third respondent is given allotment of the said plot after cancelling the allotment made to the petitioner through G.O.(2D)No.122, dated 4.6.2003, pending disposal of the appeal preferred by the petitioner. This Court directed the first respondent to dispose of the appeal after affording opportunity to the petitioner and the third respondent and by order dated 21.11.2003 made in W.P.No.18626 of 2003, this Court made it clear that the allotment made in favour of the petitioner or in favour of third respondent shall be subject to the orders that may be passed by the first respondent in the said appeal. It is also pointed out in the counter affidavit that the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.2063 Housing and Urban Development Department dated 9.11.1979 for allotment of plots by the Housing Board, wherein it is stated that the applicant should not own a house in any Corporation, Special grade and 'A' grade municipality or in any capital town in the country either in his/her name or in the name of spouse or minor children and in this case, petitioner's husband having been allotted a plot already as stated supra which was suppressed by the petitioner while submitting application and all time subsequently got an allotment and the same being noticed by the Housing Board, notice was issued to the petitioner and thereafter it was cancelled. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that even now petitioner is not denying the fact of allotment of a plot in favour of her husband prior to the allotment of plot to her. Hence the petitioner is disqualified from submitting application for allotment and therefore there is no illegality in cancelling the allotment order by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board.