BABU LAL GUPTA Vs. CHAIRMAN RAJ HOUSING BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed has been filed with the prayer that the auction proceedings conducted by the Rajasthan Housing Board (herein after "the Board') on 19-10-2011 in respect of a strip of land admeasuring 3 x 18 meters falling between Plot No.6/44, belonging to the petitioner, and Plot No.6/43 belonging to respondent No.5, Subhash Gera, in the North East Block Scheme of the Board at Alwar be declared null and void and be set aside, and the strip of land admeasuring 3 x 18 meters falling on the eastern side of Plot No.6/44, belonging to the petitioner in the North East Block Scheme Alwar be allotted to the petitioner and that the notice dated 28-12-2011 issued by the Board directing the petitioner to remove his encroachment from the said strip of land be quashed and set aside.

(2.) THE facts of the case are that in 1995 Plot No.6/44, measuring 189 sq. meters in the North East Block Scheme, Alwar was allotted to the petitioner by the Board. On the eastern side of the petitioner's plot No.6/44 and western side of the plot No.6/43 belonging to respondent No.5, a strip of land measuring 3 x 18 meters exists, whereon the petitioner states to have opened windows and ventilation of his house. To protect the strip land, the petitioner admits to have included the strip within the boundary wall of his house. THE petitioner has averred that from 1995 itself, he has been representing the Board to allot the strip of land in issue to him. It is submitted that the Board had assured the petitioner that the strip of land would be allotted to him yet the same was not so allotted.

(3.) COUNSEL for the petitioner however seeks to impugn the confirmation of the highest bid of respondent No.5 @ Rs.11,251/- per sq. meter for allotment of the strip of land falling between Plot No.6/44 and Plot No.6/43 in the North East Block Scheme Alwar at the auction of 19-10-2011. The only ground agitated by counsel for impugning the confirmation of the bid has been set out in para No.7 and ground (g) of the writ petition, wherein it has been submitted that the amount offered by the respondent No.5 in his bid had not been deposited by him within 30 days of the demand as per conditions of the auction, and such non-deposit by the respondent No.5 within the prescribed time ought to have entailed the cancellation of auction/ bid.