Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH AT ITANAGAR BENCH
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
Smt. Nang Homcha Chakap – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Arunachal Pradesh – Respondent
W.P. (C) No. 654 of 2016
Decided On : 10-12-2021
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 14 and 226 - Senior Judicial Assistant - Allotment of a quarter - Violation of principle of justice - Impugned order Director (Housing), without any notice to petitioner and without cancelling order by which one quarter was allotted her, was allotted again to private respondent No. 4 - Challenged - Petitioner is serving as Senior Judicial Assistant (SJA) in Gauhati High Court, Itanagar permanent Bench, Naharlagun - She has applied to the Director (Housing), for allotment of a quarter, in the prescribed format.
Finding of the Court:
Public orders made by public authorities are mean to have public effect and are intended to affect acting and conduct of those whom they are addressed and must be construed objectively with reference to the language using order itself. There is substance in submission, so advance by Mr. D. Panging, and the ratio led down in the case law, referred by him, also fortified the same - This is a clear case of violation of the principle of justice by the respondent authorities. The respondent authorities have cancelled the allotment order to petitioner, Vide No. DOH/ACCOM without following due process of law. It is worth mentioning here in these contacts that discretion to disobey mandate of law is not available to any authority - petitioner has succeeded in establishing violation over fundamental rights as guaranteed under Article 14 of Constitution of India, and also violation of the principle of natural justice in her case - Therefore, impugned order and also the cancellation order warrants interference of this Court.
Result: Petition allowed.
JUDGMENT :
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
1. In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, Smt. Nang Homcha Chakap, put to challenge the Order No. DOH/ACCOM-02/2012-13 (Vol-II)/ 5986-93, dated 19.12.2016, issued by the Director (Housing), Directorate of Housing, Itanagar, Government of Arunachal Pradesh. It is to be mentioned here that vide impugned order, the Director (Housing), without any notice to the petitioner and without cancelling the order dated 15.11.2016, by which one Quarter No. 604/T/II located at D-Sector, Naharlagun was allotted her, was allotted again to the private respondent No. 4-Shri Kak Nabam.
2. The factual background leading to filing of the present writ petition is adumbrated here in below:
3. Being highly aggrieved, the petitioner inquired about the matter in the Office of the Director (Housing), on 28.12.2016, and came to know that the earlier allotment order made in favour of her, was not cancelled, and without cancelling the same the State respondent again allotted the same to private respondent No. 4. It is the contention of the petitioner that, she has already occupied the quarter and she has also paid electricity and water charges of the same. And she is residing there with her two school going children and she has been put to great hardship, and that the respondent authorities have allotted the quarter to the private respondent without following the rules in a unfair manner and apply their discretion in an arbitrary and irrational manner. It is her further contention that once the quarter is allocated in her favour, her valuable right is accrued upon the same and without assigning any reason, the authorities could not have issued the impugned order. Fair play in action demands that before any prejudicial or adverse
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
