SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
N.V. RAMANA, MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR, JJ.
J.S. Luthra Academy & Another – Appellants
Versus
State of Jammu and Kashmir & Others – Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 7184-7185 of 2013
Decided On : 30-10-2018
(2012) 3 SCC 1 (2G case); (2012) 10 SCC 1; (2014) 9 SCC 516; (2015) 12 SCC 1; (2000) 8 SCC 262; (2003) 8 SCC 100; (2009) 7 SCC 561; (2018) 12 SCC 756; (2018) 4 SCC 218 – Relied upon
(2015) 1 SCC 720 – Referred
(b) Constitution of India – Articles 38 and 39 – Appellant school evicted from its previous location by Wakf Board – Making students to suffer – Plight of the students major concern for the school to ask and the government to allot the land to it – Non mention of plight of students in correspondence between school and government does not imply that the action was not motivated by welfare considerations – An executive action would not be arbitrary merely because the action is not explicitly stated to have been taken for a particular reason or based on a particular principle which in itself is reasonable – The Court should see whether such a reasonable principle is discernible from the facts and circumstances of the case – Held, action taken in public interest – Not arbitrary. (Para 7, 9)
(1991) 1 SCC 212; (2017) 4 SCC 449 – Relied upon
(c) Constitution of India – Articles 38 and 39 – Established School in main city evicted by Wakf Board for requirement of the land for its own use – Eviction not for any default of school – School allotted two Kanals, two on payment and two free of cost – Free of cost land given in nature of compensation for uprooting thee school for no fault of theirs – No error. (Para 10)
(d) Constitution of India – Articles 38, 39 – Natural resources – Allotment of land to profit earning organization – Cannot be at concessional rate or free of cost – Instantly appellant allotted two Kanals at the rate of Rs.8,00,000 per Kanal – Thus the two Kanals free of cost putting State to loss of Rs.16,00,000 – Appellant directed to make good the loss for the other two Kanals. (Para 14, 15)
(2012) 10 SCC 1; (1997) 1 SCC 164; (2011) 7 SCC 493 – Relied upon
Facts of the case:
The Appellant J.S. Luthra Academy initially was situated on a Wakf property in Jammu. Appellant was ordered by the Wakf Board to be evicted from the Wakf property.
The Academy was allotted alternate land and it finally paid a total of Rs.16,00,000/- for two kanals of land and obtained two more kanals free of cost. The Academy constructed the school building thereon and the school is being run on this premises, having shifted from the wakf property.
The Division Bench allowed the writ petitions and consequently quashed the allotment made in favour of the Academy.
Finding of the Court:
Allotting land to appellant upheld but not the free land.
Result: Appeals allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, J.
The judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir at Jammu in L.P.A. (OW) No. 38/2008 and L.P.A. (OW) No. 39/2008 dated 01.04.2009 is the subject matter of these appeals.
2. The brief facts leading to these appeals are that the Appellant J.S. Luthra Academy (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Academy’), an educational institution, initially was situated on a Wakf property in Jammu. Vide order dated 27.12.1995 of the authority constituted under the J&K Wakf Act, 1978, the said educational institution was ordered to be evicted from the Wakf property. Against the said order, the Academy approached the Jammu & Kashmir Special Tribunal, and an interim order of stay on eviction was granted by the tribunal on 09.01.1996. During the interregnum, the Academy made representations to the State Government requesting for allotment of a piece of land at any place mentioned in the representations for shifting and running the school. The concerned minister in the meeting dated 14.1.1998 considered the question of allotment of land in favour of the Academy. Subsequently, a note was prepared by the Managing Director of the J & K Housing Board on 25.1.1999, proposing that the Board had 4 kanals of land in Sector 2 of Channi Himmat, Jammu earmarked for schools which could be considered for allotment to the Appellant at Rs. 8,00,000/- per kanal. In a subsequent meeting on 29.4.1999 after completion of formalities, four kanals in Sector 2 of Channi Himmat were alloted to the Academy at Rs. 8,00,000/- per kanal on lease for 40 years and the Academy was directed to deposit 50% of the said amount, the remaining amount to be deposited subsequently. In a meeting dated 28.6.2000, a decision was taken by the J & K Housing Board in pursuance of the orders of the Chief Minister, that two kanals of land would be allotted to the Academy at the rate of Rs. 8,00,000/- per kanal and the other two kanals free of cost. Further, in a Cabinet meeting dated 18.8.2000, it was decided that the Jammu Development Authority was to be compensated for the free allocation of land in the form of allotment of alternate land to the Authority. The allotment of land to the Academy was sanctioned by the Principal Secretary, Government of J&K, vide letter dated 24.8.2000. The Academy finally paid a total of Rs.16,00,000/- for two kanals of land and obtained two more kanals free of cost. A lease deed was executed, and possession was handed over on 12.12.2001. The Academy constructed the school building thereon and the school is being run on this premises, having shifted from the wakf property.
3. The residents of Channi Himmat vide Writ Petition No. 1093 of 2002 questioned the allotment made in favour of the Academy, on the ground that the piece of land was meant for a playground but the same was allotted to the Academy in violation of the original scheme and plan of the Channi Himmat Housing Colony. One Mr. Naresh Kumar, a proprietor of the United Public School situated at Channi Himmat, filed a writ petition being O.W.P. No. 10/2003, questioning the allotment made in favour of the Academy on the ground that the property ought to have been auctioned by the Government, so that he could have also applied for the allotment of the plot, which he required for the upgradation of his school to the higher secondary level. Both the writ petitions were clubbed, heard and decided together by the learned Single Judge of the High Court and were dismissed. However, the Division Bench by the impugned judgment set aside the order of the Single Judge and allowed the writ petitions and consequently quashed the allotment made in favour of the Academy with the following observations:
“The board is directed to hold public auction of the land for the purpose of leasing the same out on the same terms and conditions it had leased it to the private respondent, except that the premium thereof shall be fixed at the highest price to be obtained at such au
Institute of Law Chandigarh v. Neeraj Sharma
Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. Union of India
Natural Resources Allocation, In Re. Special Reference No. of 1/2012
Manohar Lal Sharma v. Principal Secy.
Bharti Airtel Limited v. Union of India
Goa Foundation v. Sesa Sterlite Ltd.
Bharti Airtel Ltd. v. Union of India
Villianur Iyarkkai Padukappu Maiyam v. Union of India
Ajar Enterprises (P) Ltd. v. Satyanarayan Somani
Shrilekha Vidyarathi v. State of U.P.
Secretary, Mahatama Gandhi Mission v. Bhartiya Kamgar Sena
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.