Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
SINDHU SHARMA, J.
Sanjana Gupta – Appellant
Versus
UT of J&K and Others – Respondents
W.P. (C) No. 1903 of 2020
Decided On : 31-01-2024
Allotment - Fruit and Vegetable Market - Jammu and Kashmir Shops and Establishment Act, 1966 - [DHPM/701/2004/984] - The judgment discusses the allotment process of shop sites at the Fruit and Vegetable Market in Udhampur, Jammu and Kashmir, and the eligibility criteria for allotment as per the advertisement notice dated 14.06.2004. It highlights the irregularities in the allotment process, the verification of eligibility claims, and the legal principles governing the allotment of government land.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to quash the allotment of Shop Site No. 71 to respondent No. 6, claiming that it was originally allotted to her deceased husband and should be handed over to her as his legal heir. The court analyzed the allotment process, the grievances of the petitioners, and the subsequent re-verification of eligibility claims.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's husband did not meet the eligibility criteria for allotment as per the advertisement notice dated 14.06.2004. It concluded that the petitioner's claim for allotment was without merit and dismissed the petition.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the eligibility for allotment of Shop Site No. 71, the verification of eligibility claims, and the legality of the subsequent allotment to respondent No. 6.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the allotment process must be consistent with the doctrine of equality and conducted in a manner that enables all similarly situated eligible persons to participate. It also highlighted the importance of fulfilling the eligibility criteria for allotment of government land.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed as the court found that the petitioner's husband was ineligible for allotment, and therefore, the petitioner's claim for the same was without merit.
JUDGMENT :
SINDHU SHARMA, J.
1. The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court for quashing order dated 07.03.2020, whereby Shop Site No. 71 has been allotted to respondent No. 6 with a further direction to the official respondents to hand over the possession of Shop Site No. 71 which was allotted to her husband, deceased Ravi Shanker, being his legal heir.
2. The Directorate of Horticulture Planning and Marketing, issued an advertisement notice for allotment of shop sites at fruit and vegetable market in Udhampur vide Advertisement Notice No. DHPM/701/2004/984 dated 14.06.2004. In terms of the notice, offers were invited on the prescribed form addressed to the Director, Horticulture Planning and Marketing from Vegetable Growers/Traders/Commission Agents/Joint Firms/Societies/ Federations/Corporation and other Non-Governmental organizations dealing in the trade for allotment of shop sites at Fruit and Vegetable Markets in Charaisharief, Shopian, Handwara, Kainspora, Pressue, Kupwara, Kathua, Udhampur and Samba as per the terms and conditions given in the allotment notice.
3. The advertisement notice dated 14.06.2004, was issued for allotment of shop sites to the eligible Fruit and Vegetable Growers/Traders/Commission Agents/Joint Firms/Societies/ Federations/Corporation and other Non-Governmental organizations dealing in the trade for allotment of shop sites at Fruit and Vegetable Markets in Charaisharief, Shopian, Handwara, Kainspora, Pressue, Kupwara, Kathua, Udhampur and Samba. In response to the said notification 274 application forms were received from various Districts of Jammu Division.
4. The scrutiny of the application, after various committees, was finally concluded by the Scrutiny Committee constituted by the Director of Horticulture (P&M), Jammu. The Committee finally recommended 85 eligible applicants for allotment of shop sites in the first phase held on 13.12.2010.
5. This allotment process was challenged by some of the applicants who were aggrieved of rejection of their cases by filing writ petitions, which resulted in the stay of the process of allotment of shop sites at Fruit and Vegetable Market, Udhampur. These writ petitions, by seventeen petitioners in nine petitions, i.e. OWP Nos. 1479/2010, 1533/2010, 1539/2010 and OWP Nos. 84/2011, 85/2011, 334/2011, 1076/2011, 1196/2011and OWP No. 947/2012, were considered and disposed of vide common judgment/order dated 29.08.2013 by directing as under:
(ii) District Development Commissioner, Udhampur and Director, Horticulture Planning and Marketing, Jammu shall look into the grievance of the petitioners with regard to the allotment of some of the shops out of the slot of 85 shops to certain ineligible persons as stated hereinabove and ensure that if any shop is allotted to any ineligible person, his allotment order be cancelled without any waste of time. This exercise shall also be carried out within the aforesaid period only.
(iii) If the concerned Department is considering the other applicants hailing from other Districts, any of the petitioners, if falls in that category, his case shall also be considered on the same touchstone.
9. Interim directions stand vacated.”
6. In pursuance to the directions of this Court, the Director, Horticulture Planning and Marketing issued various notices to all the applicants, who had applied for allotment, from time to time through print media vide different notices dated 01.10.2013, 03.10.2013 in the newspaper to register their grievance for allotment at Udhampur Market. Those applicants who had filed different writ petitio
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the allotment of government land must adhere to the principles of equality and eligibility criteria, and the failure to meet the eligibility r....
The court reaffirmed that compliance with publicity requirements under the allocation rules was sufficient, despite claims of irregularities, leading to the dismissal of the petitions challenging the....
The duty of public authorities to act in a fair, objective, non-arbitrary, transparent, and non-discriminatory manner in their dealings, and the importance of procedural fairness and principles of na....
Allotment of shop in Agricultural Produce Market – To do business in shop and to carry on business on auction platform, are both different and distinct – Merely because a person is having a licence a....
Entitlement to challenge allotment requires demonstrating displacement due to construction.
Mandatory prior approval from the Assistant Collector is essential for land allotments under Section 122-C of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, making unauthorized claims invalid.
The court upheld the cancellation of a stall allotment due to unpaid rent, ruling it was not heritable and emphasized the need for transparency in allotment processes.
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
