R C THUAMA Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is preferred challenging an office order dated 08.03.2019 (Annexure-9 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent no. 3, whereby, the petitioner no. 1, the petitioner no. 3 and the petitioner no. 4 were transferred from BSUP Housing Complex, Lawipu to other BSUP Housing Complexes. The petitioners, four in nos., have challenged the said office order dated 08.03.2019 wherein the petitioner no. 2 has joined the other three writ petitioners as he had also received a show-cause notice dated 16.02.2019 like the other three writ petitioners, prior to the passing of the impugned office order dated 08.03.2019.

(2.) The Basic Service to the Urban Poor (BSUP) is a Sub-Mission under the JnNURM Programme launched to tackle urban poverty by way of relocation of urban poor people and slum dwellers. As per the guidelines issued in this regard, the main targets of the BSUP Sub-Mission are, inter-alia, to provide the basic needs to the urban poor people and to the public at large in the form of dwelling houses, water and electrical supplies and other services like education, health, occupation, etc. In so far as Aizawl city is concerned, the BSUP Projects are located in three places, (a) Chite Lawipu (Combined Project), (b) Rangvamual, and (c) Durtlang. These three BSUP Housing Projects have 408 dwelling units, 368 dwelling units and 320 dwelling units respectively.

(3.) So far as the petitioners viz. the petitioner no. 1, the petitioner no. 2 and the petitioner no. 4 are concerned, dwelling units were allotted by the respondent no. 3 by 3 (three) separate BSUP allotment orders, all dated 17.05.2018. The respondent no. 3 had issued BSUP allotment order dated 17.05.2018 in favour the wife of the petitioner no. 3 vis. Ms. R. Zothanpari. Such allotment orders were issued in favour of the petitioners after finding that they belonged to Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) and they were living in Aizawl for the past 5 years. The petitioner no. 1 was allotted House no. 101 at Block no. 16 while the petitioner no. 2 was allotted House no. 202 at Block no. 16. The wife of the petitioner no. 3 and the petitioner no. 4 were allotted House no. 202 at Block 6 and House no. 203 at Block 5 respectively. After being allotted the aforesaid dwelling units, the petitioners started living in those dwelling units from the year 2018.