The discretionary allotments made by the CMDA Chairman were invalid; any property transactions based on such allotments are unenforceable, subject to the outcomes of ongoing litigation.

ORDER :

V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.

These three writ petitions present a similar issue. Hence, they are clubbed together and disposed of through a common judgment.

2.The petitioner in W.P.No.19568 of 2015 is in possession of a shop bearing No.V/D-8 in Koyambedu Wholesale Vegetable Market. This shop was allotted to one Tmt.P.Shanthi through a proceeding of the Chief Executive Officer, CMDA on 01.04.2010. The basis for allotment was a letter given by the said Tmt.P.Shanthi to the Chairman of the CMDA on 30.09.2009.

3.The Chairman, CMDA had been conferred with the power to allot Plots/Houses/Flats/Shops etc., in all categories in all projects in M.M.Nagar, Manali New Town, KWMC, MBTT, I&SM, CMBT etc., pursuant to a resolution dated 22.10.2008. The Member Secretary, CMDA had issued a proceeding in Proc.No.K5/5455/09 on 15.07.2009 reserving 15% for the Chairman / Minister’s discretionary quota, leaving 85% to be sold through drawal of lots by CMDA till the disposal of the entire stock.

4.On the basis of the allotment so made, a sale deed was executed on 07.12.2010 in favour of Tmt.P.Shanthi. Tmt.P.Shanthi, in turn, sold the property, so allotted to her, in favour of the petitioner by way of a registered sale deed dated 15.12.2010. Even before, the sale deed was executed in favour of the writ petitioner's vendor, writ petitions were came to be filed before this Court in W.P.No.27345 of 2009, W.P.No.26735 of 2009, W.P.No.21265 of 2009 and W.P.No.29197 of 2010, inter alia, challenging the manner of allotment itself.

5.The prayer in W.P.No.27345 of 2009 was for issuance of certiorarified mandamus to quash the proceedings dated 15.07.2009 and the consequential allocation proceedings. Similarly, in W.P.No.29197 of 2010, one Karthikeyan challenged the proceedings of the Member Secretary referred to above and sought to quash the same and also to cancel all the allotments made on the basis of the said proceedings and for a direction to the CMDA to take possession of the shops allotted to the respondents 4 to 29 to the said writ petition and bring the same for public auction. In this writ petition, the Chairman cum the Minister for CMDA was impleaded as the third respondent and the beneficiaries of the allotments were also impleaded as parties. The vendor of the writ petitioner, P.Shanthi was arrayed as the 14^th respondent.

6.The First Bench of this Court consisting of the Hon'ble Mr.Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul (as he then was) and Mr.Justice M.Sathyanarayanan passed final orders on 15.12.2014. The Bench held the manner of allotment is contrary to law. It directed the shops allotted, under the Government discretionary quota, be brought for public auction.

7.Subsequently, the vendor of the writ petitioner filed a Review Application No.4 of 2015 seeking a review of the order dated 15.12.2014. The Division Bench dismissed the review.

8.Thereafter, the petitioner, Mr.M.Baskar filed a writ petition in W.P.No.13637 of 2015 seeking for a mandamus to scrap the Minister's quota allotment in all other schemes of CMDA and also to initiate criminal prosecution against the bribe-givers, bribe-takers and touts, who had benefited on account of the abuse of the discretionary quota and for consequential reliefs. That writ petition came up for disposal before Sanjay Kishan Kaul, CJ. and T.S.Sivagnanam,J. on 30.04.2015. The Division Bench dismissed the writ petition recording the following:

“2. The petitioner claims that under the Minister's Quota, shops were allotted to certain people and he admits that he had purchased one such shop bearing No.D-8 measuring 194 square feet from one P.Shanthi