Bombay High Court
Shri Ramdeobaba Charitable ... vs The Chief Officer Municipal ... on 15 June, 2017
Bench: V.A. Naik
1 J-WP-3361-16.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 3361 OF 2016
Shri Ramdeobaba Charitable Society, Akola
Through its President - Mrs. Jatin s/o
Laxminarayan Rathi, Aged about : 38 years,
Office - C/o S.S. Chavan, Ranpise Nagar,
Akola, Tq. & Dist. Akola. ..... PETITIONER
...V E R S U S...
1. The Chief Officer,
Municipal Council, Washim.
2. State of Maharashtra,
through its Principal Secretary,
Housing Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.
3. Maharashtra Housing & Area
Development Authority,
through its Chief Executive
Officer, Gruha Nirman Bhawan,
Kala Nagar, Bandra (E), Mumbai. ... RESPONDENTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri A. C. Dharmadhikari, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri A. M. Ghare, Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Mrs. Harshada Prabhu, AGP for respondent No.2.
Shri Girish Dipwani, Advocate H/f Shri N. W. Verma, Advocate for the respondent
No.3.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:-
SMT. VASANTI A NAIK &
ARUN D. UPADHYE, JJ.
DATED :-
15/06/2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per Smt. Vasanti A Naik, J.)
2 J-WP-3361-16.odt
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The writ petition
is heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned
counsel for the parties.
By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction
against the respondent No.1 - Municipal Council to release the amount
of Rs.75,000/- per Gharkul-house that is received by the Municipal
Council from the State Government in terms of the Government
Resolution dated 28/01/2014.
The petitioner - society was allotted a contract for
construction of 310 Gharkuls (houses) by the respondent No.1 -
Municipal Council on 02/07/2010. Though the houses were required to
be constructed within a stipulated period, time and again, extension
was granted by the Municipal Council for completing the construction.
In the meanwhile, by the Government Resolution dated 28/01/2014,
the State of Maharashtra took a decision that it was necessary to grant
additional grants of Rs.75,000/- for each gharkul to the Municipal
Councils that had undertaken the work of construction of Gharkuls
before 31/03./2013. As the petitioner - society was allotted the
contract on 02/07/2010 and the work of construction of Gharkuls was
in progress on 31/03/2013 in view of the extension granted by the
Municipal Council for completion of the construction work, the
3 J-WP-3361-16.odt
petitioner - society made a representation to the Municipal Council for
releasing the additional grants of Rs.75,000/- for each of the Gharkuls.
In pursuance of the claim of the petitioner, the Municipal Council sent a
proposal to the Divisional Commissioner for releasing the additional
grants. The Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority -
respondent No.3 approved the proposal pertaining to the release of
additional grants and the State Government released the additional
grants to the Municipal Council, in view of the Government Resolution
dated 28/01/2014. Since the Municipal Council did not release the
grants in favour of the petitioner, the petitioner - society has filed the
instant petition for a direction against the Municipal Council to release
the grants received by it in terms of the Government Resolution dated
28/01/2014, to the petitioner - society.
Shri Dipwani, the learned counsel holding for Shri
Hitesh Verma, the learned counsel for the respondent No.3 - MHADA
submitted that in view of the approval of the proposal for releasing
grants, the grants have been released in favour of the Municipal
Council, as per the Government Resolution dated 28/01/2014.
Shri Ghare, the learned counsel for the Municipal
Council submitted that as per the contract, the petitioner - society was
required to complete the houses within a stipulated time but the
4 J-WP-3361-16.odt
construction of the houses could not be completed within the said time.
It is submitted that though it is not disputed that extension was granted
by the Municipal Council for the construction of the work of Gharkuls,
that would not entitle the petitioner - society to additional grants as it
had not completed the construction work within the time frame. It is
submitted that 140 houses out of 310 were constructed by the
petitioner - society till 31/03/2013 and 10% of the construction of the
remaining houses is not complete.
Shri A. C. Dharmadhikari, the learned counsel for the
petitioner states that if the grants are released in favour of the
petitioner, the remaining work would be completed as early as possible.
It is stated that since grants were not released in favour of the
petitioner, a very small part of the work in respect of some houses was
not completed.
On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a
perusal of the documents annexed to the petition including the
Government Resolution dated 28/01/2014, it appears that the
petitioner - society would be entitled to receive the additional grants
towards the construction of the houses by the Government Resolution
dated 28/01/2014. The State Government has decided to release
additional grants for the construction of houses under the Gharkul
5 J-WP-3361-16.odt
Scheme as it was found that due to the escalation in the cost of
commodities, it was not possible to construct a house "Gharkul" within
the stipulated amount of Rs.1,25,000/-. The Municipal Council had not
undertaken the work of construction by itself and the contract in that
regard was allotted to the petitioner - society. The petitioner - society
would have been entitled to the additional amount as admittedly the
petitioner - society had constructed the houses. It is not in dispute that
the construction of most of the houses is complete and a very small part
of the construction of some houses is not completed. According to the
petitioner, the construction could not be completed due to lack of funds
and the failure on the part of the Municipal Council to release the
funds. The said fact is disputed by the Municipal Council. Be that as it
may, since the construction of the houses was in progress on
31/03/2013 i.e., the cut off date stipulated in the Government
Resolution dated 28/01/2014, the petitioner would be entitled to the
additional grants. Since a part of the construction work of some houses
is yet to be completed, in the circumstances of the case and in the
interest of justice, it would be necessary to release a part of the
additional grants in favour of the petitioner - society immediately and
direct the Municipal Council to release the remaining part of the grants
as soon as the construction is completed.
6 J-WP-3361-16.odt
Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, the writ petition is
allowed. The respondent - Municipal Council is directed to release an
amount of Rs.40,000/- per house (for 310 houses) to the petitioner -
society within three weeks. The amount of Rs.35,000/- per house (for
310 houses) should be released in favour of the petitioner - society as
soon as the remaining construction is completed.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no
order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Choulwar
