BHAGWAN DHAN Vs. RAJASTHAN HOUSING BOARD JAIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed with a prayer that non-petitioner No. 1, Rajasthan Housing Board, Jaipur (for brevity, 'the Board') be directed to allot a house of High Income Group (HIG) Category to the petitioner in Jawahar Nagar Scheme, Jaipur and amendment in Regulation 8 of the Rajasthan Housing Board (Disposal of Property) Regulations, 1970 (for brevity, 'the Regulations'), insofar as it gives powers to the State Government to reserve 1% of the constructed houses for allotment to any person, be declared ultra vires, struck down and all allotments made in pursuance to Regulation 8(a) be quashed.

(2.) Briefly stated, the petitioner applied for registration in General Registration Scheme of 1973, for Jaipur, for allotment of a house in Janta Group and deposited the registration amount of Rs. 100.00 for the same (Anx. 1). This Scheme was for Jawahar Nagar and Lal Kothi areas. In the year, 1981, the Board introduced revised procedure for registration of the house, the information of which was published in the newspaper (Anx.2). According to the revised procedure, such persons, who were not allotted houses till, 1981, were given choice to file applications from 1/05/1982 to June 15, '82, for change of the category. It was further stated that those who do not apply for change of the category within the above-mentioned period, their applications will not be considered, after the expiry of the period mentioned above. Thereupon, the petitioner applied for change of the category to HIG and deposited the amount of Rs. 9,900.00 with the Board (Anx. 3). Thereafter, the Board issued a letter dated 5/11/1986 (Anx. 4), by which, the category of the petitioner was changed to HIG and he had to deposit Rs. 30,000.00 in two instalments. Rs. 15,000.00 were to be deposited within a period of one month from the date of issuance of the letter and the remaining amount of Rs. 15,000.00 was to be deposited within seven months. However, the petitioner deposited Rs. 30,000.00 on 12/09/1988 (Anx. 5). An application was filed by Mr. Ajay Chug, pointing out that the applicant had not impleaded any of the persons named in Schedules I and II as parties, in whose favour, under the provisions of Regulation 8(a), allotments have been made and the applicant was also one of such allottees. It was, therefore, prayed that he may be allowed to be impleaded as party. The Court allowed this application vide order dated 18/01/1990 and Mr. Chug was impleaded as party. Another application was filed by Mr. Bhawani Sharma through Mr. G. S. Bapna, learned counsel, that he may also be impleaded as respondent, since the petitioner has challenged the allotments on the same ground and the applicant is one of the allottees and will be directly affected by the decision of this writ petition. This applicant was allowed to be heard as intervener.

(3.) It is submitted by Mr. R. S. Mehta, learned counsel, that persons, who were registered, after the petitioners, have been allotted houses, but the petitioner has not been allotted any house till today. It is further submitted that plots of HIG Group are lying vacant in Jawahar Nagar and, on these plots, houses will be constructed in future and shall be allotted to influential persons and, thus, the petitioner will be deprived of his residential accommodation in Jawahar Nagar. It is also submitted that the petitioner has been allotted preference No. 77, but he has been discriminated in allotment of house, inasmuch as, persons, whose names appear below in the list of preference, have been allotted houses and many favourites of the State Government have also been allotted houses under the provision of amended clause (a) of Regulation 8 of the Regulations. It is contended that the Board may be estopped from changing the locality and site of the house to be allotted to him, since under the scheme of 1973, he was to be allotted a house either in Jawaharnagar or in Lal Kothi Scheme. It is further contended that in Writ Petition No. 606/ 88 (Shivraj Singh Bhandari v. State of Rajasthan and others), the Board has wrongly stated in its reply to the stay application and no house in HIG category is available in Jawaharnagar for allotment. It is also contended that allotment of houses in pursuance to Regulation 8(a) of the Regulations, on directions of the State Government, is highly arbitrary, discriminatory, illegal and deserves to be quashed, as no such guidelines have been laid down for making such allotments. Such powers are not in consonance with the aims and objects of the Rajasthan Housing Board Act, 1970 (for brevity, 'the Act, 1970') framed therein. It is pointed out that by introducing Regulation 9(a), great favouritism has been made, as such persons who are not in need of houses and other influential persons have been allotted houses. It is further pointed out that names of such persons, who have been allotted houses under the provisions of Regulation 8(a) of the Regulations, have been mentioned in Schedule I attached with the writ petition, which shows that houses have been allotted to persons, who do not deserve, nor were they proper persons to have been allotted houses under the provisions of Regulation 8(a) of the Regulations. It is also pointed that certain other names of influential persons have been named in the writ petition and that their allotments deserve to be cancelled.