SRI PRAMOD KUMAR PANDA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri S. Udgata, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri D.Nayak, learned counsel for the opposite party.

(2.) Pursuant to an application filed by the father of the petitioner for allotment of an LIG House, he was allotted House No. L-1729 under Dumduma Housing Scheme, by the Orissa State Housing Board (for short 'the Board'). Intimation of the same was given to the father of the petitioner vide communication dated 21.8.1987 (Annexure- 1). The father of the petitioner made the initial deposit as required under the allotment order and thereafter continued to pay the regular instalments and had also agreed to the enhancement of sale price from Rs. 20,000.00 to Rs. 30,000.00. The registered agreement was executed on 18.8.1989 between the Secretary of the Board and father of the petitioner, according to which the father of the petitioner was required to pay the balance amount of Rs. 22,500.00 in 52 quarterly instalments.

(3.) There is no dispute about the fact that father of the petitioner continued to pay the regular quarterly instalments as per the agreement dated 18.8.1989. The father of the petitioner was thereafter required to take physical possession of the house by 15.11.1989, failing which he was to pay watch and ward charges @ Rs. 200.00 per month. However, since the construction of the house was not complete, the father of the petitioner was not given possession on the schedule date, which was in Nov., 1989. The opposite party-Board, however, continued to levy watch and ward charges. Then in the year 1993, the father of the petitioner was intimated that he should pay Rs. 12,500.00 towards watch and ward charges and take over the physical possession of the house on 30.8.199 The house was still not complete, as according to the petitioner, there were no railings in the windows, no doors in the toilets, flooring and plastering of the house were in damaged condition, and there was no water and electricity connection and thus, the possession of the house could not be taken. Thereafter, on 10.2.1995 (Annexure-8), the opposite party- Board passed the impugned order cancelling the allotment made in favour of father of the petitioner, on the ground of non-payment of watch and ward charges. Challenging the same, this writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, who has become the allottee after the death of his father.