Back
2007(8) Supreme 725
Supreme Court of india
(From Delhi High Court)
S.B. Sinha & Harjit Singh Bedi, JJ.
Mount Carmel School Society — Petitioners
versus
D.D.A. — Respondent
Appeal (civil) 5944 of 2007
(Arising out of SLP (C) No.3251 of 2006)
Decided on : 14-12-2007
Facts of the case :
Appellant a society registered under society registration Act running an educational institution applied for allotment of four acres of land for running a senior secondary school before DDA. Competent authority of DDA took a policy decision only to allot two acres of land. Several Writ petitions filed there against were dismissed by High Court.
Present Appeal has been filed against said order of High Court.
Findings of the Court :
The Court held that a large number of societies applied for allotment of land for setting up senior secondary schools. A recommendation had been made in favour of appellant by Institutional Allotment Committee on or about 23.10.1998. Indisputably, similar recommendations had been made in favour of other societies as well, including said Shri Venkateshwara Educational Society. Recommendations of the Committee, however, did not appear to have been approved by the authority. Appellant was asked to send its latest bank balance certificate and/or financial status and certain clarifications pertaining to constructions of School building. Even though a provisional allotment was made but, allegedly, appellant society failed to furnish an undertaking within period stipulated therefore. Indisputably, the Vice Chairman of Delhi Development Authority made recommendations for allotment of only two acres of land in favour of appellant. Shri Venkateshwara Educational Society, however, was allotted a land measuring four acres of land way back on 25.8.1999. Nothing to show that any allotment had been made in favour of any society allotting land having an area of four acres, after October 1999. Grounds taken in writ petition also did not specify that appellant had been discriminated against, vis-‘-vis said Shri Venkateshwara Education Society or any other allottee - Details of grant in favour of said society was not furnished. In absence of any specific contention having been raised, it was not possible for respondent to furnish any reply thereto. No argument also appeared to have been advanced in this behalf before Single Judge. Appellant, could have filed an application for review before Single Judge. However same was not done No ever committeed by High Court in passing impugned judgment.
Result : Appeal having no merit dismissed.
JUDGMENT
S.B. Sinha, J. —
1.Leave granted.
2.This appeal is directed against a judgment and order of a Division Bench of Delhi High Court dated 7.9.2005 passed in LPA No.404 of 2003.
3.Appellant is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act. It runs an educational institution. It applied for allotment of four acres of land for running a senior secondary school before the Delhi Development Authority. The Institutional Allotment Committee which was constituted by the Authority, made recommendations for allotment of four acres of land. Indisputably the competent authority of the DDA took a policy decision only to allot two acres of land.
4.Several writ petitions were filed which by reason of the impugned judgment have been dismissed by a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court. Before embarking on the questions raised before us, we may place on record that except the present appeal, other appeals were heard and dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court (Coram Hon. B.P. Singh and P.K. Balasubramanyam, JJ). The said order, however, is not a reasoned one.
5.Mr. K.K. Rai, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of appellant, submitted that the factual scenario obtaining in the present appeal is different from the others, inasmuch as recommendations of allotment of four acres of land were made both in its favour as also in favour of one Shri Venkateshwara Educational Society; but whereas in the case of the latter society four acres of land was directed to be allotted; the appellant was denied of a similar grant.
The High Court, learned counsel argued, misdirected itself in passing the impugned judgment in so far as it failed to take into consideration that the said Shri Venkateshwara Educational Society was not a necessary party in the writ petition as no relief was claimed against it, inasmuch as if the writ petition were to be allowed, the said society would not have suffered any prejudice.
6.Mr. V.B. Saharya, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, on the other hand, supported the impugned judgment.
7.The question which arose for consideration before the High Court was as to whether the Delhi Master Plan having provided for allotment of four acres of land for running of a secondary school, the Delhi Development Authority could take a policy decision of allotment only of two acres of land.
8.We have noticed hereinbefore that a large number of societies applied for allotment of land for setting up senior secondary schools. A recommendation had been made in favour of the apellant by the Institutional Allotment Committee on or about 23.10.1998. Indisputably, similar recommendations had been made in favour of other societies as well, including the said Shri Venkateshwara Educational Society. Recommendations of the Committee, however, do not appear to have been approved by the authority. It furthermore appears that the appellant was asked to send its latest bank balance certificate and/or financial status.
9.The Lt. Governor, who is Chairman of the Society, had also asked for certain clarifications pertaining to constructions of the school building. On or about 9.3.2000, a provisional allotment was made but, allegedly, the appellant society failed to furnish an undertaking within the period stipulated therefor.
10.Indisputably, the Vice Chairman of the Delhi Development Authority made recommendations for allotment of only two acres of land in favour of the appellant. Shri Venkateshwara Educational Society, however, was allotted a land measuring four acres of land way back on 25.8.1999.
11.The policy decision of the Authority which was impugned in the writ petition was taken in October 1999. It has not been shown before us that any allotment has been made in favour of any society allotting land having an area of four acres, after October 1999.
12.We may furthermore notice that the plea of discrimination raised in the writ petition was absolutely vague as it was merely averred :
“The petitioner also wrote to Respondent
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
