ROSE MARY FERNANDES Vs. ADMINISTRATOR OF COMMUNIDADES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks following reliefs:

(2.) The petitioner was a Government servant working in Goa Medical College as Staff Nurse, who retired on 31/8/2004. In the year 1980, she had applied for a plot bearing no. 4 under survey no. 57/1 of village Pilerne belonging to respondent no. 2, for the purpose of constructing a residential house. According to the petitioner, she was fully eligible for grant of such plot and neither she nor her husband owns flat, land or house in the State of Goa. She further alleged that the total formalities in respect of allotment of the plot were followed. Notice dated 2/1/1981 under Article 330 of the Code, inviting objections from public to the application of the petitioner, came to be published in the Official Gazette. On 19/4/1997, the petitioner had paid an amount of Rs. 1000/- towards processing fees. Thereafter, the petitioner was directed to submit certain documents. The petitioner says that these documents were already submitted in the year 1990. According to the petitioner, however, as a matter of abundant precaution, vide communication dated 31/3/1997, she furnished all the relevant documents, again. On 28/7/1997, the petitioner was directed to pay an amount of Rs. 2460/- as processing fees, which the petitioner paid. The petitioner alleged that since for several years the file was not processed, she addressed communication dated 7/8/1997 requesting the respondents to immediately grant the said plot of land to the petitioner. According to the petitioner, to her shock and surprise, the respondents treated the said application as a fresh application. A notice dated 8/8/1997 was published under Article 330 of the Code, in the Official Gazette, calling for objections, if any, from public. On 15/11/1997, the petitioner was directed by office of respondent no. 2 to deposit an amount of Rs.19,841/- towards development charges, shifting of electricity poles charges and towards conversation charges and the petitioner paid the said amount. Thereafter, the respondent no. 2 conveyed meeting of General Body of the Comunidade to consider case of the petitioner for allotment of the said plot. However, the petitioner was directed to file a fresh Affidavit and certificate of income, which the petitioner did in order to avoid further delay. The petitioner was directed by respondent no.1 to appear on 6/1/1999 in order to appoint Appraiser, for the purpose of inspection of site and on 12/2/1999, inspection of the said plot was carried out and the lease rent was fixed at Rs. 3000/- per year at the market rate of Rs. 150/- per square metre and evaluation of the plot at Rs. 60,000/-. However, on 5/3/1999, the respondent no.1 again directed the petitioner to submit some more documents/information, which she did. In the meantime, the Dy. Collector, North Goa, Mapusa, was pleased to grant conversion sanad dated 28/1/1998 in respect of the said plot under the provisions of Land Revenue Code. On 29/6/1999, the petitioner requested respondent no.1 to submit his file to the competent authority, but on 19/8/1999, the respondent no. 3 returned the file to the petitioner to furnish detailed affidavit as approved by the Government, stating that income certificate does not indicate family income. Thereafter, the petitioner made several requests and consequently addressed lawyer's notice dated 1/10/2002 to the respondents to complete all the formalities in respect of allotment of the said plot to the petitioner within 30 days from the receipt of the said notice. On 24/6/2003, the petitioner was directed to furnish fresh documents along with an assurance that once the documents were received, further action will be taken to obtain Government approval. On 5/8/2003, the petitioner submitted all the said documents to respondent no.1 through her lawyer's notice. Again by letters dated 3/2/2004 and 12/2/2004, the petitioner requested the respondent no. 4 to grant the said plot to the petitioner and thereafter on 5/5/2004, she filed Writ Petition no. 270/2004. On 30/8/2004, this Court disposed of the said writ petition in view of the statement made by the learned Advocate General that the petitioner's application for allotment of the said plot will be disposed of within a period of four months. On 25/10/2004, the Mamlatdar in the Collectorate called upon the petitioner to furnish information as regards flat no. B-2, which was in the name of Ms. Valencia C. Fernandes and whether the plot in survey no. 53/1 belonging to Comunidade of Pilerne has been transferred to the petitioner. By letter dated 29/10/2004, petitioner informed the Collectorate office that the said flat no. B-2 belongs to the Progressive Farmers, Builders and Contractors and the same has been allotted to Ms. Valancia C. Fernandes. It was also informed by the petitioner that the plot in survey no. 53/1 was never allotted to the petitioner. On 24/12/2004, the petitioner was informed that her application has been rejected. On 21/3/2005, the petitioner made requests to the Collector, Chief Secretary and the Secretary (Revenue) to give reasons for rejection of her application and by letter dated 18/4/2005, the petitioner was informed by the Under Secretary (Revenue) that her application has been rejected as she possesses a flat bearing no. B-2 in Block I, contrary to Section 334-A of the Code of Comunidade.

(3.) Alleging that the rejection of allotment of plot to her is illegal and contrary to Article 334-A of the Code and further contending that Explanation 1 to Article 334-A is unconstitutional and ultra vires Articles 14, 21 and 308 of the Constitution of India, petitioner filed the present petition.