RAJIV MOUDGIL Vs. H P HOUSING BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed jointly by eight petitioners seeking to command the respondents by a writ in the nature of certiorari/mandamus or such other appropriate writ, order or direction as may be deemed fit, declaring the action of the respondents in enhancing exorbitantly the price of the houses in the Housing Complex, Baddi District Solan, as illegal, arbitrary, mala fide, against the rules or principles of natural justice, violation of Articles 14, 298 and 299 of the Constitution of India and for directing the respondents to charge from the allottees of the houss only the original price i.e. Rs. 1,78,000/- as had been advertised for these houses in the advertisement marked as Annexure P-1 and that payments already made by the petitioners may be ordered to be adjusted accordingly. The petitioners then prayed that reasonable house rent at market rate which would have accrued within a reasonable time i.e. within 2-3 years to them be also allowed so that they do not have to suffer for the inefficiency and lethargy of respondent-Board in not completing the construction of the houses within a reasonable time; and that interest on the deemed house rent @ 18% may also be allowed to the petitioners in the interest of justice, equity, fair play and good conscience because they are paying interest twice in making the payment of monthly instalments to the respondent-Board and also the financial institutions from whom they have raised loans to pay off the monthly instalments.

(2.) The Himachal Pradesh Housing Board (hereinafter referred to as the respondent-Board) invited applications on the prescribed form along with earnest money for provisional registration for allotment of houses in the Hire-Purchase Hosuing Scheme Phase-I at Baddi District Solan, so as to reach the respondent-Board on or before 20-8-1988. The tentative details of houses/plots are given in Annexure P-1. The eligibility of the persons have also been prescribed in the said notification. HIG houses/plots could be allotted to the persons whose monthly income was above Rs. 2500/- and MIG houses/plots for persons earning monthly income between Rs. 1501/ to Rs. 2500/-. The earnest money was to be deposited either in the shape of demand draft on any scheduled bank or in cash in the office of the respondent-Board. Some other conditions were also imposed such as that no interest on any deposit shall be admissible at any stage whereas accommodation and costs are tentative and subject to change depending upon site conditions and cost escalation. The procedure of draw of lots to exercise choice and allotment will be as notified by the respondent-Board at the time of draw of lots. The petitioners alleged that in July 1988 in response to the advertisement issued by the respondents-Board, they applied for allotment of MIG houses on the prescribed form along with bank draft of Rs. 10,000/-. First petitioner Er. Rajiv Moudgil was allotted MIG house No. 50 vide letter marked Annexure P-2 dated 31-8-1992 in Housing Colony at Baddi on hire-purchase price of Rs. 2,80,000/-. The petitioner also alleged that on perusal of the allotment letter (Annexure P-Z) it would go to show that as per the schedule contained therein 30% of the amount was to be received by the respondent-Board from the allottees within six months of the allotment of the houses and the possession of the houses was to be delivered on payment of 15% of the cost including earnest money of Rs. 10,000/-. The petitioners have paid 30% of the price as per the schedule and as per the hire-purchase financing scheme all costs including the unforeseen expenditure was taken into account while determining the tentative cost. The petitioner alleged that they were taken by surprise by the respondent-Board when they received a letter dated 31-8-1992 marked Annexure P-Z, thereby arbitrarily increasing exorbitantly the price of the houses from Rs. 1,78,000/- to Rupees 2,80,000/- in some cases, after rescheduling the revised price. The petitioners sent detailed representation to the respondent-Board marked Annexure P-3, asking the respondent-Board to furnish the alleged nature of increase in the covered area, additional items of work, revised design and enhanced cost of land, if any, but till date no reply has been received by them from the respondent-Board. The petitioners have further alleged that the action of the respondent-Board arbitrarily increasing exorbitantly the price of the houses is patently illegal, arbitrary, mala fide, unjustified, unfair and unreasonable and no such increase has been incurred in the construction of the houses and practically neither has there been any increase in the covered areas of the houses nor there has been any additional items of work and also there has not been any enhancement in the cost of the land and the increase of the price of the houses is misleading, mischievous and is made just for covering its own defaults of inordinate delay in the completion of the houses by the respondent-Board. The petitioners have again emphasized that enhancing the price exorbitantly to the tune of as high as 60% is mainly to cover up inordinate delay of the respondent-Board which apparently has occurred due to prolonged/protracted completion of houses at a snail speed inasmuch as more than 4 years were taken and by-passing the burden on the allottees, was clearly and squarely unreasonable, unfair and unjustified. The increase of the price according to the petitioners most of whom belong to services class has burdened them to raise extra loans from different agencies like LIC, HIMFED etc., and in order to stick to a reasonable time schedule most of the petitioners have taken extra loans which has also increased the burden of the petitioners to the tune of Rs. 6,000/- per month. The petitioners alleged that the action of the respondent-Board is not only illegal, arbitrary, mala fide but is also hit by the doctrine of equitable estoppel inasmuch as neither manifold increase was contemplated at the time of declaring the scheme nor the respondent-Board is coming out with clean hands justifying such an exorbitant increase.

(3.) The petitioners alleged that a delegation of the allottees in the year 1989 had met the Chairman of the respondent-Board and complained to him that the construction of the houses was going on at a snail speed and the delay in construction of the houses might delay the delivery of possession to the allottees and might lead to higher cost of construction. The Chairman had assured the delegation that all efforts were being made to stick to the time schedule and the amount of the enhancement in cost, if at all, would not be more than 5%. But the respondent-Board has arbitrarily enhanced the price exorbitantly to the extent of 60% and declaring the revised payment schedule, it has in fact acted mischievously inasmuch as construction of houses was further delayed. The petitioners again reiterated that the arbitrariness and malafides on the part of the respondent-Board are writ large for the single reason that the construction of the houses at Baddi (First Phase) was inordinately delayed with the intent to coincide its completion with the commencement of construction of Second Phase houses at Baddi so that the staff deployed for the First Phase may not have to be shifted and putting thereby the allottees of First Phase to much enhanced cost and the completion of the houses was made intentionally at the fag end of August, 1992 and the possession given to the allottees in September/October, 1992. On these premise the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking the relief noticed above.