Allahabad High Court
Mohan Lal vs Secy. L.D.A. Gomti Nagar Lucknow ... on 7 July, 2017
Bench: Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, Vivek Chaudhary
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 1
Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 14282 of 2017
Petitioner :- Mohan Lal
Respondent :- Secy. L.D.A. Gomti Nagar Lucknow And Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- O.P. Tiwari,Rajendra Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Amit Kumar Dwivedi,Ratnesh Chandra,S.S.H.Zaidi
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
Issue notice to the respondent nos. 6 and 7 returnable at an early date. Steps within 3 days.
Notices have been accepted by Sri Ratnesh Chandra along with Sri S.S.H. Zaidi on behalf of respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3, notice on behalf of respondent no. 4 has been accepted by Sri Amit Dwivedi and the notice on behalf of respondent no. 5 has been accepted by the learned Standing Counsel.
This is a writ petition, which during the course of our scrutiny, has assumed dimensions that require further steps to be taken in this regard inasmuch as the Lucknow Development Authority has now proceeded to lodge a First Information Report with police station Wazirganj, Lucknow and the intimation given to the said police station in writing by the Section Officer, Sharada Nagar Yojna has been placed before us.
The genesis of the dispute is that petitioner claims to be in occupation of house no 2/281, Ruchi Khand-II, Raebareli Road, Sharda Nagar, district Lucknow. He claims to have got the said property allotted in terms of a preliminary letter of offer for allotment which has been described as a letter letter of allotment dated 04.07.1983. Certain deposit receipts have been filed to substantiate the said claim.
The petitioner also claims to have taken an electricity connection for which he alleges to be paying bills after having occupied the same for the past several years. The date of acquisition or taking possession has not been disclosed.
The cause of action arose to the petitioner when his electricity connection was disconnected which he alleges to have happened at the instance of respondent no.7, who claims to have got a sale deed executed in his favour from one Ramesh Chandra Gupta. The said sale deed has been filed on record and it further transpires that Ramesh Chandra Gupta had claimed to have acquired the same property by virtue of a sale deed said to have been executed by the official of the Lucknow Development Authority, namely Sri Shailendra Mall, Officer In-charge (Estates). A copy of the said sale deed is on record.
After the matter was heard on earlier occasions, we had called upon the learned counsel for the Lucknow Development Authority to examine the said alleged claim of the petitioner of allotment and deposit. The stand that has been continuously taken before us is that the Lucknow Development Authority has never handed over possession of the said property to the petitioner and even otherwise, has denied the execution of the sale deed by the Lucknow Development Authority in favour of Ramesh Chandra Gupta. It is contended that these transactions are fake transactions without there being any document to support the allotment either in favour of Ramesh Chandra Gupta or for that matter in favour of the petitioner. The sequence therefore is that the sale deed in favour of respondent no. 7 is also invalid.
We would, therefore like the Lucknow Development Authority to investigate into the matter and for that the Vice Chairman shall get the matter inquired into and file his affidavit about the entire status of the claim as alleged by the petitioner inasmuch as, prima facie, we do not find any valid procedure having been followed for allotment for the reasons that the petitioner claims his initial allotment under the Economically Weaker Section Scheme, 1983 in Aliganj and then a conversion later on of his allotment in the Middle Income Group in relation to the present house which is a different scheme altogether. We are unable to gather any connectivity of the said transactions, nor have the learned counsel for the Lucknow Development Authority been able to produce any such material before us to establish this connectivity or otherwise the correct status of the allotment of the premises, which according to the Lucknow Development Authority, is a constructed MIG House bearing No. 2/281, Ruchi Khand-II, Sharda Nagar, Raebareli Road, Lucknow.
Prima facie, it appears that this entire episode may involve an element of connivance of the Lucknow Development Authority officials in extending benefit either to the petitioner or the persons who are claiming title through a sale deed and the transactions also do not appear to be in accordance with laws and may be fraudulent. Thus, in order to ascertain the correct status and the gravity of the matter, we direct the Vice Chairman, Lucknow Development Authority to forthwith inquire into the matter and file his personal affidavit by 21.07.2017.
The Vice Chairman shall take appropriate steps and further in the event if it is found that the officials of the Lucknow Development Authority are either directly or indirectly responsible for the same, then he will take immediate action in this regard against such officials. The lodging of the First Information Report by itself demonstrates that the Lucknow Development Authority is itself seriously doubtful about such transactions.
The affidavit of the Vice Chairman shall also indicate all material that may otherwise indicate any claim of the petitioner having been registered with the Lucknow Development Authority and its disposal or any authorization in this regard including the so called conversion of the petitioner's claim by way of adjustment from the EWS Scheme of Aliganj to MIG allotment in Ruchi Khand-II, as indicated above.
Any laxity shown in this behalf shall be seriously taken by this Court. Consequently, we further direct that while conducting the inquiry, the Vice Chairman shall also get a spot inspection made with regard to the status of the property and its alleged occupation.
Let the matter be listed accordingly on 21.07.2017.
In the event, the affidavit is not filed, the Vice Chairman, Lucknow Development Authority shall be present before the Court on the date fixed.
As per our direction, the concerned official is stated to be present in Court, whose photograph is alleged to be pasted on the sale deed said to have been executed in favour of Ramesh Chandra Gupta.
Order Date :- 7.7.2017/psd
(Vivek Chaudhary,J.) (Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.)
