RAJESH KUMAR DWIVEDI Vs. KANPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who belongs to Economically Weaker Section of Society, filed this petition raising grievance of arbitrariness and discrimination by Kanpur Development Authority (KDA in short). THE petitioner has claimed violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India for making demand of Rs. 26,763-00 as price of flat No. A-424 EWS allotted to petitioner in the development scheme known as Barrah Pariyojna at Kanpur. THE grievance of discrimination has arisen as KDA has allotted similar flat in same scheme for Rs. 152911-25 to other allottees while petitioner has been asked to pay a higher price.

(2.) KDA is a Development Authority constituted under section 4 of U. P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973. To achieve one of its object it framed a schema for building dwelling units in shape of flats with financial aid from the "World Bank" under development scheme. The disputed flat has been constructed for economically weaker section of society under said scheme and it is known as flat of fourth category under scheme. According to brochure issued by KDA for making applications for allotment of a flat the estimated cost and price of each flat was Rs 9,000/- which was finally determined on revision as Rs. 15,291-25. After determination of price as Rs. 15,291-25. each allottee of flat of same category was asked to pay Rs. 15, 291-25 as price of flats while petitioner has been asked to pay Rs. 26,763-00 for a similar flat, which has given rise to this petition. As the flat of petitioner was constructed simultaneously with other flats of same category and was of same kind, the petitioner has claimed that he could not be asked to pay more than what was being paid by other allottees. It has been argued on behalf of petitioner that the petitioner has been asked to pay more arbitrarily without any reasonable basis and, therefore, the demand from petitioner to pay more than what others were asked to pay violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) THE KDA has asked petitioner to pay Rs. 11,471-75 which price is about 42 86% more than what has been for similar other flats. THE demand of such higher sum is perse discriminatory. No more facts, are required for establishing violation of Constitutional right of equality enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Once it is established that the present case is of discrimination per-se then the onus of proof is on KDA to justify the demand of higher amount on some reasonable basis.