SARADA DEVI Vs. CUTTACK DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed with a prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing opposite party Cuttack Development Authority to issue final allotment order to the petitioner and handover possession of Plot No.83 C/464 in Sector 8, Bidanasi Project Area allotted in her favour within a specified time.

(2.) PETITIONER 's case in a nut shell is that she is a landless widow. She had applied for a plot on 18.05.1991 in Abhinab Bidanasi Project Area, Cuttack bearing Regd. No.C 952 and deposited the initial deposit of Rs.20,000/ . The petitioner was intimated by the CDA vide letter No.16777/CDA dated 18.08.1995 (Annexure 1) that she had been provisionally selected for allotment of 'C' category plot in Sector 8/Sector 11 in Bidanasi Project Area on payment of sixteen quarterly instalments basis. Therefore, the petitioner was asked to submit her willingness by 31.10.1995 accepting the allotment along with first instalment of Rs.4,740/ . Accordingly, the petitioner submitted her willingness and deposited the first instalment of Rs.4740/ towards cost of the plot allotted in her favour. The petitioner also deposited all the subsequent instalments totaling to Rs.95,840/ in time with the CDA towards entire cost of the plot. The CDA by its letter No.17827/CDA dated 23.10.1999 (Annexure 2) intimated the petitioner that the escalated cost of 'C' category plot has been fixed to Rs.1,44,056/ and asked the petitioner to pay the differential amount of Rs.48,216/ [Rs.1,44,056/ Rs.95,840/] along with interest of Rs.2,200/ , thus the total amount of Rs.50,416/ within three months from the date of issue of letter. As per the selection held on 03.12.1999 the plot bearing No.83 C/464 in Sector 8 was allotted in favour of the petitioner and after selection, the CDA by its letter No.3153 dated 04.02.2000 (Annexurer 3) intimated the petitioner to pay Rs.50,416/ along with the additional cost of Rs.4,322/ towards situational advantage. Since the husband of the petitioner was suffering from cancer which was detected in the month of February March, 1999 and ultimately the husband of the petitioner expired on 22.06.1999, the petitioner could not deposit the amount as directed vide letter dated 23.10.1999 (Annexure 2) and also could not deposit Rs.4,322/ as required under Annexure 3. With much difficulty, the petitioner deposited Rs.50,000/ on 15.05.2002 before the CDA along with an application indicating therein to allow her two months time to deposit the balance amount and requested the CDA to intimate her about the balance amount to be paid. The said letter did not yield any result. However, the petitioner to show her bona fide, deposited another Rs.50,000/ on 04.02.2003. Since the opposite party did not take any step for issuance of final allotment order and handing over possession of the plot, the petitioner made an inquiry in the office of the CDA and came to know that the CDA with ulterior and mala fide intention was trying to allot the said plot to another person on the influence of the Minister canceling her allotment. Hence, the present writ petition.

(3.) MR . D. Mohapatra, learned counsel appearing for opposite party CDA submitted that the petitioner having failed to deposit the escalation amount even after repeated reminders issued including reminder No.18099/CDA dated 16.08.2001, the CDA has cancelled the plot with intimation to the petitioner vide letter dated 16.04.2002. Thereafter, the petitioner requested the CDA vide letter dated 06.05.2002 for revocation of the cancellation of plot and to allow her to deposit the balance amount within 10 days which she failed to do. Without any permission of the CDA, petitioner deposited Rs.50,000/ on 15.05.2002 with further request to allow her two months' time to deposit the balance amount. The CDA in its letter No.3357 dated 01.02.2003 informed the petitioner that her request for revocation of cancellation order No.7848 dated 16.04.2002 has not been considered by the authority and she was requested to submit the original money receipt or deposit slip within one month of issue of the order to enable CDA to refund the amount. The petitioner thereafter suo motu deposited further amount of Rs.50,000/ in the account of the CDA on 04.02.2003. Mr. Mohapatra submitted that the plot of the petitioner has been cancelled and any deposit thereafter suo motu will not entitle the petitioner for revocation of the cancellation and accordingly her prayer was rejected. Concluding his argument, Mr. Mohapatra prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.