HARI RAM KHATRI Vs. NOTIFIED COMMITTEE JAISALMER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER by this writ petition has prayed that by an appropriate writ, order or direction the order passed by the respondent on 23. 12. 89 Anx. 10 cancelling the allotment of the petitioner of four residential plots may be quashed and the allotment of these four residential plots should be allowed to remain intact.

(2.) THE petitioner is a resident of Jaisalmer and is working as Assistant Manager, Jaisalmer, Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Jaisalmer. THE Notified Area Committee Jaisalmer (hereinafter referred as the Committee) decided to allot commercial plots out side Amar Sagar Pirol by public auction in the year 1983 and the petitioner applied for allotment of two such commercial plots. Two commercial plots bearing Nos. 4 and 5 situated outside Amar Sagar Pirol were purchased in public auction by the petitioner on 16. 11. 83 for a sum of Rs. 19,500/- and 19001/- respectively. One fourth of the auction price were deposited by the petitioner to the committee. THEreafter the petitioner was informed on 29. 5. 84 that the administrative sanction of the above two plots sold to him in open auction had been received and he was directed to deposit the balance three-fourth auction price within 30 days. In pursuance to this letter, petitioner deposited the remaining amount. THE petitioner approached the Executive Officer several times for executing the lease-deed in respect of the aforesaid two plots and handing over the possession but the same was not given. THEreafter the matter was considered in the meeting of the committee dt. 12. 9. 85 which was presided over by the then Collector. THEreafter the petitioner was allotted the four residential plots in lieu of the two commercial plots which were required by the town planner for development of the area and these four plots were allotted to the petitioner vide order dt. 15. 10. 85 Anx. 4. THE petitioner was asked to deposit the excess amount in a sum of Rs. 3740/ -. THE possession of this land was not given and the petitioner requested the Executive Officer to execute the lease-deed and he deposited the necessary stamp for execution of the same. But that could not be done and suddenly on 23. 12. 89 vide Anx. 19 all these four plots in favour of the petitioner were cancelled. Aggrieved against this the petitioner rushed to this court by filing the present writ petition.