Case Note & Summary
The case involves a dispute between two public trusts, Smt. Kasturibai Sukharam Khandelwal Trust (appellant) and Shri Khandelwal Trust (2nd respondent), over allotment of land by the Indore Development Authority (IDA). The 2nd respondent made direct applications to IDA and the Chief Minister in 1988 for land for a community hall. IDA issued an advertisement on 7th September 1989 inviting applications from registered institutions. The appellant Trust applied pursuant to the advertisement on 9th October 1989. IDA allotted 50,000 sq. ft. to the appellant and 30,000 sq. ft. to the 2nd respondent on 2nd July 1990. Upon realizing that both trusts belonged to the same community and the allotments were in the same scheme, IDA cancelled the 2nd respondent's allotment by Resolution No. 21 dated 11th February 1991 and confirmed the appellant's allotment. The 2nd respondent challenged this cancellation in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on 1st February 2001. In letters patent appeal, the Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court, on 4th November 2008, directed IDA to reconsider the matter afresh after hearing the parties and making a comparative assessment. Both IDA and the appellant Trust appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court noted that the 2nd respondent had not applied pursuant to the advertisement, which was mandatory under the Disposal Regulations, 1987. The Court held that IDA's cancellation of the 2nd respondent's allotment was justified as it was based on an erroneous processing of an application not in compliance with the regulations. The Court further observed that the 2nd respondent had not appeared before the Supreme Court, indicating disinterest. Additionally, the appellant had already constructed a community hall on the allotted land and was using it for public purposes. The Court concluded that remanding the matter at this stage would serve no purpose. Accordingly, the Supreme Court allowed both appeals, set aside the Division Bench's judgment, and upheld the allotment in favor of the appellant Trust.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Land Allotment - Compliance with Statutory Regulations - The allotment of land by a development authority must be in accordance with the Regulations for Disposal, 1987 framed under the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973. An application not made pursuant to a public advertisement cannot be considered for allotment. (Paras 6-7, 12-15)
B) Natural Justice - Opportunity of Hearing - No Right to be Heard - Where an applicant has not complied with the prescribed procedure for allotment, there is no vested right and the principle of audi alteram partem is not attracted. Calling such applicant for hearing would be an empty formality. (Paras 14-15)
C) Writ Jurisdiction - Remand - Futility - The High Court, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction, should not remand a matter for fresh consideration when the factual position has changed, the allottee has constructed and is using the property for public purpose, and the other party has shown disinterest. Such remand serves no purpose. (Paras 16-17)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Division Bench of the High Court was justified in directing the Indore Development Authority to reconsider the allotment of land afresh after the appellant Trust had already constructed a community hall and the 2nd respondent had shown disinterest.
Final Decision
Both appeals are allowed. The impugned judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court dated 4th November 2008 is set aside. No costs. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
Law Points
- Allotment of land by development authority must comply with statutory regulations
- Application not pursuant to advertisement cannot be considered
- Principles of natural justice not violated when no right exists
- Delay and change of circumstances render remand futile
Case Details
2019 LawText (SC) (10) 91
Civil Appeal No(s). 5308 of 2010 and Civil Appeal No(s). 5309 of 2010
N.V. Ramana, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Ajay Rastogi
Smt. Kasturibai Sukharam Khandelwal Trust (in Civil Appeal No. 5308/2010) and Indore Development Authority (in Civil Appeal No. 5309/2010)
Indore Development Authority & Ors. (in Civil Appeal No. 5308/2010) and Shri Khandelwal Trust & Ors. (in Civil Appeal No. 5309/2010)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil appeals against the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh directing the Indore Development Authority to reconsider the allotment of land to two public trusts.
Remedy Sought
The appellant Trust and the Indore Development Authority sought setting aside of the High Court's order remanding the matter for fresh consideration.
Filing Reason
The appellant Trust and the Indore Development Authority were dissatisfied with the High Court's direction to reconsider the allotment of land afresh.
Previous Decisions
The Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the 2nd respondent on 1st February 2001. The Division Bench allowed the appeal on 4th November 2008 and directed reconsideration.
Issues
Whether the Division Bench of the High Court was justified in directing the Indore Development Authority to reconsider the allotment of land afresh after the appellant Trust had already constructed a community hall and the 2nd respondent had shown disinterest.
Whether the allotment made to the appellant Trust was in compliance with the Regulations for Disposal, 1987.
Whether the cancellation of the 2nd respondent's allotment without hearing violated principles of natural justice.
Submissions/Arguments
The appellant Trust argued that the allotment was made in compliance with the Disposal Regulations, 1987, and the 2nd respondent had not applied pursuant to the advertisement, so the cancellation was justified.
The Indore Development Authority submitted that the 2nd respondent's application was not in compliance with the regulations and the decision to cancel was correct.
The 2nd respondent did not appear before the Supreme Court despite service.
Ratio Decidendi
An allotment of land made in compliance with statutory regulations cannot be reopened after the allottee has constructed and is using the property for public purpose, especially when the other party has not applied pursuant to the advertisement and has shown disinterest. Principles of natural justice are not attracted when the applicant has no vested right.
Judgment Excerpts
Indisputedly, the 2nd respondent had not submitted any application for allotment of land pursuant to an advertisement inviting applications for allotment of land dated 7th September, 1989, despite being published in the local newspaper.
After noticing that the 2nd respondent had submitted application for allotment of land for community hall on 30th September, 1988 directly to the Indore Development Authority and to the then Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh dated 29th December, 1988 which was erroneously processed in the office of the authority...
In the ordinary course of business, there was no justification for the authority to consider the application of the 2nd respondent which was not in due compliance and in terms of the advertisement in reference to which the applications were invited.
Directing the Indore Development Authority to revisit the matter afresh at this stage when the lease deed of the plot has been executed and the appellant has raised construction and is running a community hall for the benefit of the public at large and at the same time, the 2nd respondent has shown complete disinterest in the proceedings, no purpose otherwise will be served...
Procedural History
The 2nd respondent filed a writ petition under Article 226 before the Madhya Pradesh High Court challenging the cancellation of its allotment. The Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on 1st February 2001. The 2nd respondent appealed to the Division Bench, which on 4th November 2008 directed the Indore Development Authority to reconsider the matter afresh. Both the appellant Trust and the Indore Development Authority appealed to the Supreme Court.
Acts & Sections
- Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973: Section 58, Section 86
- Regulations for Disposal, 1987: Chapter III, Regulation 3(A), Regulation 3(B), Regulation 3(C), Regulation 3(D)
- Constitution of India: Article 226
