SAROJ LATA JAIN Vs. HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks a amandamus directing the respondents to allot a residential plot measuring 1.5 Kanals in Sector 21 at Gurgaon on the ground that she was declared successful for the allotment of a plot measuring 1.5 Kanals in the final draw of the lots held on 9th May, 1986, vide letter Annexure P1, but the allotment has been denied to her on the ground that the plot which was alloted to her was under litigation.

(2.) In the written statement filed by the respondents, it has been submitted in para 7 that two plots Nos. 113 and 117, each measuring 1.5 Kanals are available with the respondents in Sector 21 at Gurgaon.

(3.) Earlier an identical matter came up for consideration before a Division Bench of this Court in Avtar Krishan Sood and another v. The State of Haryana and others, 1988 2 RRR 151, wherein it was held that when the plots are available with the plots are available with the respondent, it is not only their legal responsibility but also moral responsibility too to accommodate the petitioners first in the Sectors where the plots are available. It was further held that the Government runs the State not only with a sense of responsibility but with a great degree of morality. While allowing the petition, the respondents were directed to allot a plot each to the petitioners in the same Sectors to which each was held entitled for allotment on the same terms and conditions as if the plot to be alloted was originally alloted. Aggrieved by this verdict, the Haryana Urban Development Authority filed a Special Leave Petition No. 15299 of 1988 (Civil) in the Supreme Court of India, in which while confirming the findings of the Division Bench in Avtar Krishan Sood's case , the Supreme Court modified the order to the extent that "a fair solution would be to call upon the respondents to pay 50 per cent more of the rate at which they were originally offered the plots when the lots were drawn for the plots".