Point of Law:
Beneficial provisions meant to ameliorate the poor condition of slum dwellers, in our considered view, should not be jettisoned only on technical grounds or procedural infirmities unless the persons coming to the court and seeking relief through writ petition are able to show that they have suffered injustice or legal injury

JUDGMENT :

V.M. Pancholi, J.

1. This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, in which, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:

"(A) Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and to hold and declare that the respondents have no power, authority or competence to frame the scheme by administrative orders and transfer the properties of the petitioners in favour of respondent building;

(B) Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and to hold and declare that the respondents have no power, authority or competence to transfer the title of the properties in favour of the respondent builder without following due process of law;

(C) Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and to direct the respondents not to remove the petitioners from the premises held, owned, possessed and occupied by the petitioners, without following due process of law;

(CC) Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and to declare that the Scheme framed by the State Government at Annexure-B dated February 11, 2016 bearing No. Resolution/BJZ/102014/1642/TH-1 as ultra vires to the provisions of section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908; Section 54 of the Transfer of Properties Act, 1882 and Section 19 of the Gujarat Ownerships Flats Act, 1973, and Article 300A of the Constitution of India and, therefore, be pleased to quash the same.

(D) Pending admission and final disposal of the present petition, be pleased to restrain the respondents, their agents and servants from disturbing the occupation and possession of the petitioners in respect of the premises owned, held, possessed and occupied by the petitioners, without following due procedure known to law;

(E) Be pleased to pass such other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper."

2. The factual matrix of the present case is as under:

2.1 The petitioners are allottees of housing quarters, namely, "Arvind Maniyar Quarters" (hereinafter referred to as "the quarters"). It is stated that land bearing Survey No. 442 of Rajkot City was developed by the Municipal Corporation with the aid and assistance of Housing and Urban Development Corporation (HUDCO), which is a Central Government venture. The said development scheme is called as "Arvind Maniyar Quarters". By public draw, the eligible persons were selected from amongst the lot and allotted the quarters to 208 persons. The constructed area is 47.37 sq. meters having 1 BHK. The said scheme has been developed on Hire Purchase Agreement. Allottees of each of the 208 quarters were required to make payment on hire charges of Rs. 350/- per month. The total value of each of the quarters was fixed at Rs. 18,000/-.

2.2 It is further stated that the Municipal Corporation passed a Resolution on 28.07.1992 wherein it is resolved that a Deed of Conveyance shall be executed in favour of the person, who had paid the total amount of Rs. 18,000/-. City Engineer was authorized to execute Deed of Conveyance in favour of the holder of the quarter. Another Resolution was passed on 10.03.2000 wherein the properties, which were used other than the residential properties, were also required to be regularized after charging transfer fees. Thereafter, the Sale Deed was executed in favour of the concerned party in the year 2006. The Deed of Conveyance clearly states that the property has been transferred in favour of the holder of the quarter. It has been specifically mentioned that common amenities in the common lands are under common ownership of the flat holders. Thus, it has been referred that ownership would be as per the provisions of the Gujarat Ownerships Flats Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1973" for