Back
1994 Supreme(SC) 1216
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K. RAMASWAMY AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.
M/s. Shori Lal & Sons and another, Appellants
Versus
Delhi Development Authority and another, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 632 of 1986 with C.M.P. No. 38020 of 1986
Decided on 1-12-1994.
N.D.GARG, R.K.JAIN, RAJIV K.GARG, RANJIT GHOSAL, SOLI J.SORABJI, V.B.SAHARYA
Headnote:
Constitution Of India,1950 - Enquiry Committee - Delhi Development Authority - Sales Tax number and by paying damages for occupation of both lands in its name - Delhi Development Authority for purposes of assessing damages recoverable for square yards of land in treated that land as Premises and opened file therefore - Further for purposes of assessing damages recoverable for squares yards of land in Plot Khan treated that land as Premises and opened file therefore - However in year in its Endeavour to clear up government land at Delhi where iron & steel businesses were carried on by various persons and firms occupying it unauthorized sought to allot to such persons and firms alternate plots for their businesses in area covered by Warehousing Scheme - Sizes of alternate plots which were to be allotted to persons and firms ready to shift from their plots in government land at vacating them had to be done according to following criteria – Held, Public bodies like DDA which are trustees of public properties and are to carry out public functions in our view cannot escape their accountability for their failure to carry out orders of this Court made in public interest - Officers who are guilty of in action in our view should be proceeded against in contempt action - Adoption of such course in our view is necessary for reason that if officers or similar public bodies are directed by this Court to confer benefits on certain ineligible persons either because of such officers inaction because of conferment by such officers of similar benefits on others who were ineligible for them same could result not only in public loss but also in providing unwarranted protection to officers from their liability for punitive action on account of wrongs committed by them - However in facts of present case and its concerned officers court feel should be given further opportunity to carry out orders of this Court in matter of constituting an Enquiry Committee and enquiring into irregularities or illegalities adverted to in orders and making report therefore before making them liable to inaction if any – Court therefore propose to grant as last chance to DDA and its concerned officers three months time to comply with orders Court made make report of remedial action taken in matter before proceeding to take contempt action against them for non-compliance with orders of this Court - Registry of this Court shall put up this case for orders in matters immediately on expiry of three months from today – Appeal dismissed
JUDGMENT
VENKATACHALA, J.:—This appeal by special leave is directed against the Order dated 1-2-1985 by which Writ Petition, C.W.P. No. 1264 of 1984 of the appellants was dismissed by the Delhi High Court.
2. Briefly stated, the facts are :-
Shori Lal and his minor sons were among those who migrated from Pakistan to India after its partition in 1947. In the year 1949 Shori Lal occupied 177 square yards of Government land out of Plot No. 10242, Motia Khan, Paharganj, Delhi for setting up a business in iron and steel under the name of his proprietory concern M/s. Shori Lal & Sons. In the year 1956, Shori Lals proprietary concern M/s. Shori Lal & Sons became partnership firm since Shori Lals first son, Krishan Kumar (Appellant-2), who on attaining the age of majority, was admitted as its partner. Shori Lals second son, Manmohan Lal was also admitted as the partner of M/s. Shori Lal & Sons in the year 1962 when he attained the age of majority. In the meantime 322 square yards of land out of Plot No. 10242, Moti Khan, lying on the rear side of the land of 177 square yards of land, where M/s. Shori Lal & Sons carried on its iron & steel business came to be occupied by it in the name of its partner Krishan Kumar for its godown. However. M/s. Shori Lal & Sons carried on its iron business in the said two places under a single Sales Tax number and by paying damages for occupation of both the lands in its name. Delhi Development Authority (DDA) for purposes of assessing damages recoverable for 322 square yards of land in Plot No. 10242, Motia Khan, treated that land as Premises No. 117 and opened a file therefore as No. D/JH/ KM-117. Further DDA for purposes of assessing damages recoverable for 177 squares yards of land in Plot No. 10242, Moti Khan, treated that land as Premises No. 115 and opened a file therefor as No. DJ/JH/KM-115.
3. However, in the year 1975, DDA in its endeavour to clear up government land at Motia Khan, Delhi where iron & steel businesses were carried on by various persons and firms occupying it unauthorisedly, sought to allot to such persons and firms alternate plots for their businesses in the area covered by Naraina Warehousing Scheme. Sizes of alternate plots which were to be allotted to persons and firms, ready to shift from their plots in government land at Motia Khan, by vacating them, had to be done according to the following criteria:
Existing area under occupation Area to be allotted
Below 50 Sq. yds. 91.86 sq. yrds.
51 to 100 sq. yds. 125 sq.yds.
101 to 150 sq. yds. 172.22 sq.yds.
151 to 200 sq. yds. 200 sq.yds.
201 to 250 sq.yds. 250 sq.yds
251 to 300 sq.yds. 300 sq.yds.
301 to 400 sq.yds. 400 sq.yds.
401 sq.yds. and above 450 sq.yds.
4. On applications made to DDA for obtaining such allotment, Plot No. X-70 of 200 sq.yds. in Naraina Warehousing Scheme was allotted on 21-7-1975 in lieu of Premises No. 115 measuring 177 sq.yds. in Motia Khan and Plot No. Y-5 of 450 sq.yds. in Naraina Warehousing Scheme was allotted on 25-7-1975 in lieu of both Premises No. 117 measuring 322 sq.yds. of land in Motia Khan and Premises No. 115 measuring 177 sq.yds. of land in Motia Khan.
5. But, on complaints received at a latter stage when it was discovered by DDA that Plots Nos. X-70 and Y-5 in the Naraina Warehousing Scheme allotted in lieu of extents of lands in Premises Nos. 117 and 115 in Motia Khan, had an extent of land far in excess of the extent of the land to the allotment of which appellants were entitled under the settled criteria and such allotment of excessive land had been obtained by Appellant-2 by practising fraud on it, the DDA sought to withdraw the allotment of Plot No. X-70 of 200 sq.yds. in the Naraina Warehousing Scheme made in favour of the appellants. When the DDA sent the communication dated 5-5-1984 to the appellant about the withdrawal of such allotment and the retaking of possession of Plot No. X-70, the appellants challenged the validity of that communication, by filing writ petition, C.W.P. No.
