The Jharkhand High Court while setting aside the order of cancellation of allotment observed that the state authorities are expected to act and be fair to its citizens and cannot take a shifting stance putting into jeopardy their life and livelihood and in any case, the cancellation of allotment could not have been done unilaterally without even hearing the parties who had been evicted from the shops on assurance of allotment.
Brief Facts:
The present petition has been filed for commanding upon respondent no.4 to allot the shops to the petitioners in Ram Chandra Bazar Haat Complex in view of the memorandum of agreement entered between the petitioners and respondent no.4.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
it was contended on behalf of the petitioners that they were evicted from shops on the assurance of allotment in the upcoming complex on a preferential basis and further, they vacated the shops under the legitimate expectation that after construction of the complex, shops would be allotted to them. It is the further case of the petitioners that to decide over-allotment, the lottery was held in which all the petitioners qualified and they deposited Rs.5000/- as security amount and Rs.50,000/- as the initial payment and which they entered into an agreement with regard to the allotment of the shops, despite which the respondent-Municipal Corporation possession was not handed over
Contentions of the Respondent:
A counter affidavit was filed on behalf of respondents wherein it was asserted that the said allotments were canceled vide order dated 26.10.2022 as the project was not found feasible due to heavy traffic pressure in that particular area, and the security deposit has already been refunded to some of the depositors.
Observations of the Court:
The court stated that it is yet another example of the intransigence of the State authorities, in matters that have a direct bearing on the livelihood of small shopkeepers, who had been allotted shops after receiving the security deposit, and without any show cause, the allotment has been cancelled behind their back.
The court stated that the state authorities are expected to act and be fair to its citizens and cannot take a shifting stance putting into jeopardy their life and livelihood and in any case, the cancellation of allotment could not have been done unilaterally without even hearing the parties who had been evicted from the shops on assurance of allotment to be made and they had been selected successfully on lottery and had also deposited the security deposit.
The decision of the Court:
The court set aside the order of cancellation of allotment and remitted the matter back to the respondents.
Case Title: Amar Nath Gupta and ors. vs State of Jharkhand and ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Mr Justice Gautam Kumar Choudhary
Case No.: W.P.(C) No. 3306 of 2023
Advocate for the Applicant: Mr. Ankit Kumar
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Prashant Kumar Rai and Mr. Rajesh Kumar
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
