SAROJKANTA MALLICK Vs. BHUBANESWAR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition involves a challenge to the impugned order dtd. 17/5/2022 passed by the Allotment Officer-1, Bhubaneswar Development Authority (for short 'the B.D.A.') under Annexure-17 with further request to any other allotment/possession of Plot No.108 of Prachi Enclave Plotted Development Scheme in Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar.

(2.) The writ petition was entertained on 28/5/2012 with an interim order directing operation of the impugned order at Annexure-17 shall be stayed till next date, which order appears to be continuing as of now.

(3.) Factual background involving the case is that petitioner while working as a Junior Assistant, came across of Kalinga Nagar Plotted Development Scheme floated by the B.D.A. in 1991. A copy of brochure being obtained, petitioner had applied for a plot and in the consideration process petitioner was also allotted with Plot No.K-9-A/143 under Kalinga Nagar Plotted Development Scheme from out of discretionary quota following Clause-8(a)of the brochure vide Annexure-1. After allotment of the plot in favour of the petitioner, on arrangement of a purchaser petitioner applied for transfer of the said plot to one Farhat Nizami and the transfer on consent of the Development Authority was effected though a pre-possession transfer vide office order dtd. 27/12/1999. The copy of the brochure and the copy of the transfer order dtd. 27/12/1999 find place at Annexures-1 and 2 respectively. It is while the matter stood thus, petitioner on the premises of having no residential/commercial plot in Bhubaneswar area came to own Plot No.262 under District Centre Commercial Plotted Development Scheme at Chandrasekharpur of the B.D.A. again by way of pre possession and change of allotment from a previous allottee vide Office Order dtd. 29/6/2000. Petitioner has a clear disclosure that he is in possession of a commercial plot being allotted by the B.D.A. from 15/9/2001 It is on the petitioner having no residential plot in Bhubaneswar and under the premises there is no bar in applying for a residential plot even if in possession of a commercial plot under any of the scheme of the Development Authority, on 29/9/2000, petitioner applied for allotment of a residential plot under Prachi Enclave Plotted Development Scheme at Chandrasekharpur. The brochure hereinabove finds place at Annexure-4 to the writ petition. It is pleaded that the brochure had a clear clause vide paragraph-9 (A) 5 at Annexure-4 containing 2% i.e. at least 3 plots under the scheme were reserved for the staff of B.D.A. It is for the working of the Prachi Enclave Plotted Development Scheme lottery procedure was adopted considering a number of applicants available even under discretionary quota and the petitioner could have been selected in the lottery process for allotment of a plot under the scheme under the B.D.A. Staff Reservation Quota and in the process, petitioner was served with letter of allotment vide Letter No.336/AL/BDA, Bhubaneswar dated 09.Jan, 2001 intimating him the selection for the allotment of a plot under the scheme indicated hereinabove. While the matter stood thus, unanimous allegation came to be filed against the petitioner and the matter got into investigation by the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Bhubaneswar. Information being sought from the Development Authority, the Development Authority appears to have been supplied necessary information and relevant documents to Vigilance for their doing the needful. There is however pleading in paragraph-10 of the writ petition that the Development Authority informed the Vigilance Authority intimating that there was no bar for allotment of Commercial plot as well as residential plot in favour of petitioner within the Municipal area of Bhubaneswar. Through paragraph-11 of the writ petition, it is pleaded that Vigilance Authority deemed to have closed the proceeding. After the Vigilance proceeding got closed, lottery process was effected and in the lottery process Plot No.108 of Prchi Enclave Plotted Development Scheme fell to the petitioner. In the meantime, depending on the closure of Vigilance Proceeding, petitioner as well as 2 other employees of Bhubaneswar Development Authority namely, Mr.Ambika Prasad Mohanty and Smt.Prativa Baskey were in entitlement of plots under staff quota. Consequently, final allotment orders being issued, all such persons had taken possession of the residential plot under the scheme involved. Finding there is difficulty, petitioner brought a writ petition vide W.P.(C).No.853 of 2008 for Development Authority not issuing the allotment order involving Prachi Enclave Plotted Development Scheme, Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar. This Court disposed of the matter on 7/2/2008 authorizing the petitioner to furnish fresh representation within ten days before the Allotment Officer of the Development Authority and the Development Authority-opposite party no.3 therein was directed to dispose of such representation within a month thereafter. Following the development in the aforesaid writ petition, the petitioner filed a representation vide Annexure-11 series. Basing on a charge-sheet against the petitioner dtd. 5/12/2008, proceeding since drawn against the petitioner, petitioner filed written statement of defence involving such proceeding on 27/8/2011. There has been appointment of Inquiry Officer and Marshalling Officer for taking up the inquiry into the charges against the petitioner. It is brought to the notice of the Court through the pleading at paragraph-23 of the brief that challenging the initiation of Disciplinary Proceeding, the petitioner brought W.P.(C).No.28898 of 2011 and this Court entertaining the said writ petition on 3/11/2011 while issuing notice directed the petitioner to co-operate the Inquiry Authority in allowing continuance of the proceeding. However, there was direction not to pass final order without leave of the Court.