JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. SHEETAL TAMBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed against the judgment dated 05.04.2013, passed by the JDA Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur which allowed the respondent -appellant's (hereinafter "the appellant") appeal under Section 83(8)(a) of the Jaipur Development Authority Act, 1982 (hereinafter "the Act of 1982"), quashed the JDA's letter/order dated 19.11.2010 and directed it to take into consideration the Tribunal's decision between the year 2000 and 18.02.2009 and in terms of the Appellate Tribunal's judgment dated 06.09.2005 and 18.02.2009, issue a lease -deed in favour of the appellant within a period of three months, failing which the appellant was at liberty to take proceedings under the Contempt of Court Act against the officers of the JDA for non -compliance with the Appellate Tribunal's orders as also if so advised claim damages against the JDA.

(2.) THE facts of the case are that the appellant filed an appeal bearing No. 5/2011 against the JDA alleging that she had purchased plot No. 225 from its erstwhile owner and original allottee, Shri Vishwa Ratan Bhargava under agreement dated 20.11.1996. The said plot was situated in Maharana Pratap Nagar, Jhotwara, Jaipur in Scheme No. 22, floated by Sindhu Nagar Grah Nirman Sahakari Simiti Ltd., Jaipur (hereinafter "the Society"). It was stated that the appellant had earlier filed a reference bearing No. 74/2000 whereupon the JDA Tribunal vide its order dated 19.07.2001 restrained the JDA from laying any road through plot No. 225 and further that the appellant not be dispossessed therefrom. The JDA not complying with the order dated 19.07.2001, the appellant moved a contempt petition bearing No. 33/2004 before the Appellate Tribunal stating that despite its order dated 19.07.2001, 'Patta' for plot No. 225, Maharana Pratap Nagar, Jaipur was not being issued to her. The contempt petition was dismissed vide order dated 29.11.2004 for the reason that there being no specific direction to issue a lease -deed to the appellant, no contravention of the Appellate Tribunal's order was made out. In the circumstances, the appellant filed yet another reference bearing No. 420/04 submitting that in terms of the Appellate Tribunal's earlier order dated 19.07.2001, the Zonal Level Committee in its meeting dated 06.12.2003 had deleted the proposed road over plot No. 225, Maharana Pratap Nagar, Jaipur. Yet in spite of the Appellate Tribunal's earlier order dated 19.07.2001 protecting the appellant's possession over the plot No. 225, she was arbitrarily not being issued a lease -deed in respect thereof even while the plot in issue was not a part of facility area but part of plotted area in Maharana Pratap Nagar, Jaipur as approved by the JDA on a lay out plan submitted by the society". Vide order dated 06.09.2005, the Appellate Tribunal again allowed the second reference bearing No. 420/2004 and directed the JDA to issue a lease -deed in favour of the appellant as per law. It was stated that however even following the order dated 06.09.2005, passed by the Appellate Tribunal in the appellant's reference No. 420/2004, she was informed vide JDA's letter dated 27.05.2006 that since the allotment of plot No. 225 aforesaid was made by the Society, the lease -deed in respect thereof could only be issued, despite the Appellate Tribunal's order dated 06.09.2005, on the appellant's establishing her physical possession over the plot in question.

(3.) MR . Mahendra Goyal, appearing for the petitioner -JDA has submitted that the impugned order dated 05.04.2013 is unsustainable for the reason that in terms of the Appellate Tribunal's earlier judgment dated 18.02.2009 in the appeal preferred by the appellant, she had the alternative of laying a suit for damages against the non -issue of lease -deed to her pertaining the plot No. 225 in the approved Scheme No. 22, Maharana Pratap Nagar, Jaipur floated by the Society. It was submitted that the appellant not admittedly being in physical possession of the aforesaid plot, in terms of the instructions issued by the JDA in its guideline for regularization of plots and grant of lease -deeds, it was not permissible to issue a lease -deed to applicant who was not in physical possession of the plot allotted to her by the Society albeit a letter of allotment had indeed been issued to her following purchase from the original allottee of the Society. Counsel submitted that the appellant had the liberty in terms of the earlier order dated 18.02.2009 passed by the Appellate Tribunal to lay a suit for damages for non -issue of lease -deed and the Appellate Tribunal earlier having addressed the appellant's appeal with regard to the issue of lease -deed for plot in issue and its order dated 18.02.2009 having become final, it was not for the Appellate Tribunal to entertain the subsequent appeal bearing No. 5/2011 afresh and modify its earlier order and instead mandatorily bind the JDA to issue a lease -deed to the appellant vide the impugned order dated 05.04.2013.