The court ruled that preferential land allotment policies favoring certain privileged groups violate Article 14 of the Constitution, undermining equality and public interest.

JUDGMENT :

SANJIV KHANNA, CJI.

Leave granted in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 19838 of 2010.

2. This common judgment decides the cross appeals which impugn the judgment dated 05.01.2010, of the Division Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Writ Petition Nos. 7956, 7997, and 23682 of 2008. These Writ Petitions challenged the allotment of land parcels, vide several State Government Memoranda¹ [For short, “GoM.”], within the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation limits. The land was allocated to Cooperative Societies composed of members of various groups, including Members of Parliament² [For short, “MP.”], Members of both houses of the State Legislature³ [For short, “MLA.”], officers of All India Services⁴ [For short, “AIS.”], Judges of the Supreme Court and High Court⁵ [We note that while the Judges of the Supreme Court and High Court have withdrawn their claims and are not seeking allotment, we have addressed their category for the purpose of tackling the legal issue arising out of allotment made under GoM No. 243], State Government employees, defence personnel, journalists and individuals from weaker sections of society.

3. The High Court, in the impugned judgment, has partly allowed the Writ Petitions, quashing the GoMs that laid down the allotment policy and facilitate the allotments to the Cooperative Societies. It held that the parcels of land allotted to the respondents were to be restored to the Government, and that fresh allotments can only be made following the issuance of appropriate GoMs consistent with the judgment. The High Court further directed that before such GoMs are issued, the State shall call for details of members who meet the eligibility criteria; ensure they sign affidavits declaring their eligibility; and publish this information on its website for public access. Any false declaration will result in cancellation of the allotment, and initiation of civil and criminal proceedings.

4. While the Cooperative Societies, their members, and the State of Telangana⁶ [Refer to the order dated 30.03.2016 passed by this Court, giving directions for amendment in the Cause Title] have preferred appeals contesting these directions, Mr. Keshav Rao Jadhav, the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 23682/2008, has filed a cross-appeal. Mr. Keshav Rao Jadhav prays that preferential allotment of land – particularly at basic rates – to MLAs, MPs, journalists, officers of the AIS and Judges, is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, as it violates the right to equality guaranteed under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

FACTS OF THE CASE

5. On 28.02.2005, the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued three GoMs – Nos. 242, 243 and 244. GoM No. 242 established a comprehensive policy for managing land resources and housing in urban and semi-urban areas. GoM No. 243 outlined categories of individuals eligible for land allotment, while GoM No. 244 provided guidelines for this process.

6. GoM No. 242 emphasized the urgent need for prudent management of land resources in urban and semi-urban areas due to rising urbanization and increasing demand for housing. Due to growing urbanisation, demand for land for housing purposes has surged. It highlighted the challenges faced by the working middle class, as private developers often artificially inflate land prices, making it difficult for them to secure plots. Recognizing that providing shelter is a top priority for the State, the Government had previously formulated a housing scheme for the poor. However, there was no fixed policy catering to “other deserving sections” of the society. Consequently, the Government decided that a comprehensive policy was necessary, leading to the issuance of GoM No. 242. Key stipulations of the GoM include:

• Creation of a land bank, source-pooled for allotment to various housing Cooperative Societies and other target groups.

• The source of the land bank would consist of land located in and around 120 municipalities with clear titles.

• The land would