1. Allotments for 31 Shops/Halls situated at Bahu Plaza Complex, Jammu, made by the Jammu Development Authority were found to have been made without following the procedure of Open Auction. The Jammu and Kashmir Government, in exercise of power, under Section 37 of the Jammu and Kashmir Development Act, 1970, hereinafter to be referred as "the Act", therefore, issued directions vide Government Order No. 1126-GAD of 1997 dated 22.09.2007 to the Jammu Development Authority to cancel the allotments and take appropriate steps for restoration of the property.

2. The Government Order aforementioned has been questioned in all these writ petitions which, taken up for joint consideration, are being disposed of by this judgment.

3. Justifying the allotments of the Shops/Halls made in their favour, the petitioners have, inter alia, pleaded that the Government Order impugned in the writ petitions, canceling their allotments, was illegal and unwarranted, in that, it had been issued without complying with the statutory requirement of issuing notice to them, in terms of the Proviso to Section 37 of the Act, before issuing directions which affect their rights, And that the State Government had initiated action directing cancellation of the allotments, on the basis of truncated information which the Vice Chairman of the Jammu Development Authority, hereinafter to be referred as "the Authority", had supplied to it. It is stated that the decision taken by the Board of Directors of the Authority in its 65th meeting providing for its earlier Board Resolution for making the allotment of Shops/Halls on First Come First Served, basis, to remain operational until all the Shops/Halls were allotted, had not been brought to the notice of the Government by the Vice Chairman of the Authority.

4. According to the petitioners, the Government had cancelled the allotments to avoid embarrassment to the Chief Minister whose brother had been allotted space at Bahu Plaza Complex Jammu, in violation of the decision of the Authority to follow the First Come First Served, rule.

5. The State Government has justified the impugned Government Order saying that the Board Resolution of the Authority adopted in its 65th meeting was unwarranted, in that, it had been taken without holding any deliberations on the subject, and the fact situation, that the area had been fully developed and the Authority would get better price for the Shops and Spaces at Bahu Plaza Complex, Jammu had not been taken into consideration. The 65th meeting of the Board of Directors, where the post facto approval of the Board had been obtained, is stated to have been a result of the non-application of mind by the Authority. It is further stated by the State-respondents that the Authority had not given publicity to its policy of First Come First Served, in the matter of allotment of Shops/Spaces available at Bahu Plaza Complex so as to provide opportunity to all those who were interested in availing the opportunity, the allotments were, therefore, illegal and improper.

6. The specific plea raised by the petitioners in their writ petitions that the Government had not heard them before issuing directions under Section 37 of the Act, has not been adverted to by the State-respondents and all that has been said in this respect is that the Government had issued the impugned order after due application of mind and in terms of the provisions of Section 37 of the Act, which, according to them, would not prejudice the petitioners because they can project their grievance, if any, while responding to the show cause notice which has been issued by the Jammu Development Authority to them pursuant to the Government Order in question.

7. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners, the counsel for the Authority and learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State-respondents.

8. The first issue that falls for consideration in these petitions is as to whether the Government was obliged

Click Here to Read the rest of this document