TARAMAN CHETTRI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these writ petitions have been filed as Public Interest Litigation alleging abuse and misuse of powers by Shri Sonam Wangdi, the former Chief Secretary, Government of Sikkim and some other Government Officers. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. (C) 1 of 2000, Taraman Chettri, claims himself to be a social worker whereas United Weman Welfare Club, Gyalsing, West Sikkim, petitioner No. 1 in Writ Petition (C) No. 58 of 1999, is an Association, registered with the Government of Sikkim and petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 therein the elected President and General Secretary respecively thereof. United Women Welfare Club claims itself to be a social organisation with its members as the social workers. Writ Petition (C) No. 58 of 1999 was instituted on 21st Sept. 1999 and Writ Petition (C) No. 1 of 2000 was instituted on 7th Jan. 2000. Writ Petition No. 1 of 2000 has 19 (nineteen) respondents whereas Writ Petition (C) No. 58 of 1999 has 6 (six) respondents. But these petitions are similar in nature, though Writ Petition (C) No. 1 of 2000 which was subsequently instituted is somewhat more comprehensive. It would, therefore, be sufficient to refer to the facts only Writ Petition (C) No. 1 of 2000.

(2.) The petitioner's case in writ petition No. 1 of 2000, in short, is that Shri Sonam Wangdi, respondent No. 5, by virtue of his different official positions during his service under the Sikkim Government and in gross misuse and abuse of his powers managed to get allotment of two house sites in the name of Mrs. Shova Rai (respondent No. 6), a school teacher, who is now his second wife, in a very tactful manner. Vide Memo No. 72(S)1917/UD and HD dated 25th Sept. 1996 issued by the Town Planner, Urban Development and housing Department, Government of Sikkim, respondent No. 3, a site in plot No. 35, at Jorethang, South Sikkim measuring about 500 sqf. was allotted to Smt. Shova Rai alias Wangdi, for construction of residential building on certain terms and conditions and v ide order No. 8(1)1224/UD and HD dated 6th Nov., 1997 issued by the Assistant Town Planner, respondent No. 4, the approval of grant for construction of building thereon was conveyed to her. Subsequently, vide Order No. GOS/22(5)UD and HD/98-99 dated 19th August 1998, she was allotted another plot in Namchi in violation of Section 6 of the Sikkim Allotment of House Sites and Construction of Building (Regulation and Control) Act, 1985, (in short the said Act) which provides that the Government cannot allot more than one site to one family in the State, and as such a family cannot have more than one allotted housing site. The petitioner has further alleged that according to the true object and scope of the Act, the Governent is supposed to allot sites to the poor downtrodden people of the society and also to the lower earning Government employees who have to pay sky high rent for their accommodation in the absence of any accommodation of their own and though such people having applied for the sites long ago are still waiting for their turn to come, yet in the instant case, Smt. Shova Rai alias Wangdi, was allotted two housing sites. The petitioner has further alleged that in the lease deed dated 19th August, 1998, Smt. Shova Rai alias Shova Wangdi, respondent No. 6 has been intentionally described as Shova Rai wife of Shri D.M. Rai in collusion with the Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Sikkim, respondent No. 2, even though at that time, she was the wife of Shri Soman Wangdi, respondent No. 5. it is alleged that this has been done by Shri Sonam Wangdi, respondent No. 5 in collusion with the Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department, Government of Sikkim, respondent No. 2 to create an impression that Shri Sonam Wangdi, respondent No. 5, had no hand in the illegal allotment of the Namchi plot. Second allegation made by the petitioner is that since no divorce was obtained by Shri Sonam Wangdi, from his former wife Smt. Chumsang Wangdi alias Bhutia, respondent No. 11, Shri Sonam Wangdi could not marry Shova Rai, respondent No. 6 without the permission of the Government, but Shri Sonam Wangdi, married Smt. Shova Rai without obtaining permission from the Government which amounts to misconduct on the part of Shri Sonam Wangdi and Smt. Shova Rai under the relevant Service Conduct Rules. Third allegation is that Shri Sonam Wangdi also managed to get the sanction of Rs. 2.50 lakh in the name of Smt. Shova Rai alias Wangdi, as specail loan for the construction of her house and in the note sheet regarding of loan Smt. Shova Rai alias Shova Wangdi was described as Shova Chettri at Serial No. 12 so that nobody would raise fingers against the abuse of power by Shri Sonam Wangdi, who influenced his subordinate officers for grant of loan Rs. 2.50 lakh in favour of his second wife. Fourth allegation is that on the site allotted to Smt. Shova Rai alias Wangdi in the year 1998 at Namchi, South Sikkim, the Government has spent about Rs. 20 lakh for providing a chlidren part, for the benefit of the children of the area, but on account of the illegal allotment of the site, the children park as going to be converted into residential building and consequently the large sum of money already spent by the Goverment thereon would be rendered of no use and further the environment and ecology would be seriously affected by such consversion. Fifth allegation is that Shri Sonam Wangdi constructed a hotel, namely, 'Hotel Rendezvous' by investing Rs. 70 to 80 lakh, including the value of furniture inside the hotel, either in his name or in the name of his first wife and if an enquiry is made in terms of order of the Court, it will reveal that the property of Shri Sonam Wangdi is disprportionate to the known sources of his income and those of his wife, Chumsang Wangdi, respondent No. 11 or those of his son Palden Wangdi, respondent No. 12, or those of his younger son Tendup Wangdi, respondent No. 13. Sixth allegation is that the land upon which 'Hotel Rendezvous' was constructed stood in the name of Smt. Chumsang Butia, respondent No. 11, but Shri Sonam Wangdi in collusion with the then Registrar (East) got the land transferred either in the name of Shri Pladen Wangdi, respondent No. 12 or in the name of the Shri Tendup Wangdi, respondent No.13, but Smt. Chumsang Butia, repsondent No. 11 did not execute the Gift Deed/Transfer Deed. Seventh allegation is that an approach road to 'Hotel Rendezvous' was constructed on the Government hospital land/compound at the expenses of the State Government and the road has been constructed as motorable road solely for the said 'Hotel Rendezvous' for personal gain to either respondent No. 5 or 11 or 12 or 13. The petitioner has alleged that Chief Secretary being the top ranking statutory authority is required under law to see that the statutory provisions are strictly enforced, but in the instant case, he himself is involved in corruption, nepotism and favouritism and because of the illegal allotment of site, sanction of loan, holding of disproportionate wealth, public interest has seriously suffered and the same has caused tremendous dissatisfaction amongst the people . The petitioner has further alleged in paragraph 25(i) that on 18th Nov. 1999 Shri Sonam Wangdi took leave and proceeded to Jorethang and took photographs and set up some people to show that they had trespassed over the land allotted to Smt. Shova Rai alias Shova Wangdi or her family members at Jorethang. Respondent No. 2, Secretary, Urban Development and Housing Department and other officers of the Urban Development and Housing Department accompanied Shri Sonam Wangdi so that the entire State machinery prepared the case in favour of Smt. Shova Wangdi. Some more allegations of misuse and abuse of power have been made in the writ petition. The petitioner has claimed mandamus commanding the respondents to withdraw, cancel and rescind the impugned allotment of site to respondent No. 6 vide orders 25th Sept. 1996 and 19th August, 1998, a direction to respondent No. 5 to pay the expenses incurred by the State Exchequer along with interest for the Government land and for the motorable road constructed for this personal gain and a direction to the CBI to enquire into the illegal allotment of sites in favour of respondent No. 6 and also into the disproportionate assets of respondent No. 5.

(3.) Except for respondent Nos. 1, 7, 8, 9, 10, 18 and 19, all the respondents have filed counter-affidavits. Shri L.B. Rani, Secretary in the Department of Urban Development and Housing, in the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 , who are the State of Sikkim, Department of Urban Development and Housing, Town Planner, Urban Development and Housing Department and Assistant Town Planner, Urban Development and Housing Department, has denied that Shri Soman Wangdi by virtue of his different official positions during his service under the Sikkim Government, had misused and abused his powers and managed to get allotment of two house sites in the name of his second wife, respondent No. 6. Though it has been admitted that Smt. Shova Rai, respondent No. 6, was allotted a site on 25th Sept. 1996 vide allotment No. 72(8)1917/UD and HD, it has been asserted that the site was transferred in the name of Ranjita Rai, a daughter of Smt. Shova Rai. The land transferred is plot No. 35 but its possession could not be taken by Ranjita Rai as it is in the occupation of an illegal occupant and so Ranjita Rai has applied for an alternative site. The application of Ranjita Rai dated 3rd Nov. 1999 has been enclosed with the counter-affdavit. It is further alleged that Smt. Shova Rai later applied for fresh site and she was allotted on 19th August, 1998 the Namchi plot vide order No. GOS/22/5/UD and HD/98-99. Allegations of mala fides have been denied. It is also denied that Shri Sonam Wangdi managed to get sanction of specified loan of Rs. 2.50 lakh in the name of respondent No. 6 for the construction of her house and it has been asserted that the loan was sanctioned in consideration of the merits of her request made to the Finance Department. Regarding the children park, it is stated that a sum of Rs. 20 lakh was sanctioned for development of Namchi Town under the Integrated Development of Small Madium Towns Scheme. Within this amount a sum of Rs. 3 lakh was allocated for the purpose of developing the children park. Accordingly, within comprehensive scheme a small area was identified at Namchi for setting up the children park. Necessary equipment for children park , namely, swings, slides, etc. were installed but, later it appeared that the equipment had been installed on an unused water tank. It is further alleged that there were public complaints that the area had become risky for children as the manholes of the undergrond water tank had only stones as covers, and as the covers had been, pilfered away the children park had remained unused and most of the equipment installed had been missing and so request of Smt. Shova Rai for allotment of the site within that area was considered and allowed. In reply to the allegationss of the petitioner with respect to the ownership of the site of the Hotel, respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 stated :