Back
2014 Supreme(Guj) 720
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA & J.B.PARDIWALA, JJ.
TEJENDRA JAYANT TAMBE – Appellant
Versus
GOVT OF GUJARAT & 4 ORS. – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 238 of 2013
Decided on: 31/07/2014
Advocate Appeared
MR AS SUPEHIA, amicus curiae for the Applicant. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Opponent No. 1
MR HS MUNSHAW, ADVOCATE for the Opponent No. 2
MR MAULIK G NANAVATI, ADVOCATE for the Opponent No. 4
MR NACHIKET A DAVE, ADVOCATE for the Opponent No. 5
Restriction of property transfers to natural heirs of the original allottees and action against defaulting allottees
Headnote:
Public Interest Litigation - Illegal Allotment of Flats - Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 - Summary: The court addressed the illegal allotment of flats meant for financially weaker sections of society by Vadodra Urban Development Authority (VUDA). It highlighted the discrepancies in allotment, collapse of buildings, and the subsequent actions taken by VUDA for reconstruction. The court directed VUDA to restrict property transfers to natural heirs of the original allottees and to take action against defaulting allottees.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner raised concerns about illegal allotment of flats meant for financially weaker sections of society by VUDA. The buildings collapsed, resulting in fatalities, and VUDA took measures for reconstruction. The original petitioner withdrew, and an amicus curiae was appointed to proceed with the case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found discrepancies in the allotment process, collapse of buildings, and subsequent actions taken by VUDA for reconstruction. It directed VUDA to restrict property transfers to natural heirs of the original allottees and to take action against defaulting allottees.
Issues: Illegal allotment of flats, collapse of buildings, reconstruction measures, property transfers, defaulting allottees
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized restricting property transfers to natural heirs of the original allottees and taking action against defaulting allottees. It also directed VUDA to comply with the specified requirements for new allotments.
Final Decision: The court directed VUDA to comply with the specified requirements for new allotments and take action against defaulting allottees.
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA)
1. By this Public Interest Litigation, the petitioner, one Tejendra J. Tambe, claiming to a public-spirited person, has drawn the attention of this Court to various illegalities in the matter of allotment of flats which were constructed for financially weaker sections of the society by Vadodra Urban Development Authority [VUDA, hereafter] constituted by the State of Gujarat.
2. The case made out by the petitioner may be summed up thus:
[a]. Government of Gujarat had acquired two distinct pieces of land for development of economical houses for financially weaker sections of the Society called as “Madhavnagar” and “Keshavnagar” in Atladra, Vadodara.
[b]. After purchase and acquisition of the land by Government of Gujarat, the development and construction contract was awarded to VUDA established by Government of Gujarat under section 22 of the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976. VUDA has further contracted builders / developers / architects to develop schemes of 458 apartments in Madhavnagar development area and 266 apartments in Keshavnagar development area according to structural design and engineering by VUDA and in association with other related Government and private agencies.
[c]. As per verbal information received from the current occupants, approximate construction and development cost was Rs.5 Crores for 724 houses [excluding the price of the land purchased and acquired by the Government] for both the projects, and thus each house cost Rs.70,000/- in the year 2001.]
[d]. The above information was based on estimate and reasonable prevailing market rate of construction, viz. Rs.450/-per sq. mtr. of good quality immovable property in the year 2001.
[e]. The above scheme was designed for the benefit of financially weaker sections of the society by the public authority, VUDA.
[f]. Each flat consists of one room, kitchen, bathroom and toilet and the total carpet area is 161 sq. ft., which would be sufficient to accommodate three persons, viz. husband, wife and a child.
[g]. Thus, the object of the Scheme was to provide cost efficient housing and residential arrangement on long terms lease basis for welfare of financially weaker section of the Society.
[g]. Madhavnagar Scheme was ready in the year 2001 and occupancy right was given in the year 2002 by VUDA to some purchasers; similarly, the occupancy right was given to the general public in Keshavnagar from the year 2006 onwards.
[h]. In both the housing schemes, many houses were illegally allotted by VUDA to relatives and associates of some public servants with good political influence, who were not from the financially weaker section of the Society.
[i]. In the year 2006, VUDA decided to give the rest of the vacant houses for benefit of needy economically weaker sections of public at old rates of the year 2001 and low monthly rents with the help of government subsidy. The reason for delay of 6 years in lawful disposal of constructed houses was never clarified or informed to general public by AUDA.
[j]. Around 724 families were living in these houses of Madhavnagar and Keshavnagar, and out of 724, around 30% current occupants were bonafide purchasers from financially weaker sections of the Society, who were paying the regular monthly instalments to VUDA.
[k]. The remaining, around 70% current occupants are tenants also from financially weaker section of the Society, who were paying illegal rents and profits to these government owned properties to VUDA agents who are illegal purchasers.
[l]. The current occupants made several complaints to VUDA regarding poor construction but VUDA denied for repairs and maintenance of the premises.
[m]. Two buildings collapsed in the early morning around 4 a.m. on 28th August 2013 and 11 innocent people, who were occupants of the collapsed buildings, died.
[n]. Some teams of technical experts have informed and advised the disturbed homeless occupants to
