Public authorities must prioritize welfare commitments over commercial considerations, as seen in the admissibility of judicial directives regarding housing schemes and the application of the doctrine of approbation and reprobation.

JUDGMENT :

MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO, J.

1. The appellant Life Insurance Corporation of India through its Deputy Chief Engineer have preferred this appeal challenging the judgment dated 01.09.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 976 of 2013. In the appeal the appellants have prayed to set aside the impugned judgment dated 01.09.2023 with a further praying before the Court to hold that the letter dated 06.09.2011 cancelling allotment of the flat to be just and proper.

2. The respondent had filed the writ petition with the following prayer :

“(i) Issue a Rule Nisi in the nature of writ of mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions calling upon opposite parties to show cause as to why the impugned letter dt.6.9.2011 (Annexure-8) shall not be quashed and they shall not be directed to hand over possession of Flat No.203 of Block No-2A at Policy Holders’ Housing Scheme (PH-II) at Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar on receiving the balance amount as per the Scheme.

And

(ii) If the opposite parties fail to show cause and/or show insufficient and/or false cause, make the said. Rule Nisi absolute;

And

(iii) Pass any other appropriate order/orders, direction/directions and grant any other relief/reliefs to which the petitioner is entitled;

And

(iv) Allow the writ application with costs,”

3. The uncontroverted and undisputed facts of the case have been noted by the learned Single Judge. The facts in brief are reproduced herein :

That the petitioner is a citizen of India and is a permanent resident of State of Odisha. The cause of action for filing the writ application has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court.

3.1 In the year 2008 the Life Insurance Corporation of India floated a scheme, Policy Holders’ Housing Scheme(PHHS) for sale of flats to its policy holders in Jeevan Bima Nagar-Phase-II at Chandrasekharpur, Bhubaneswar specifically termed as “Jeevan Bima Nagar’ Phase-II scheme. A copy of the scheme is enclosed to the writ petition marked as Annexure-1.

3.2 The petitioner being a LIC policy holder purchased the prescribed application form on payment of Rs.1,000/- and submitted it before the Opp.Party No.1 along with the registration fee of Rs.50,000/- in the shape of bank draft for allotment of a flat under the scheme.

4. The contention of the petitioner before the learned Single Judge in the writ petition that due to backing out the financer he could not arrange the consideration amount, found favour. The writ petition was allowed and following was observed and directed :

“xxx xxx xxx

20. Through Clause-6, this Court, however, finds while there is power with the Opposite Party No. 1 to extend the period beyond the stipulated period on convincing grounds, there is also provision made in case of deferred payment or delayed payment beyond the stipulated period, there shall be loading of simple interest @ 6% per annum for the extended period.

21. For the readiness of the Petitioner preparing a Bank Draft even prior to the date of cancellation, further for the correspondence of its own dated 28.07.2012 vide Annexure-12, this Court finds, there is no doubt that the case of the Petitioner was kept pending consideration at least till 28.07.2012. For the pleadings of the both parties, this Court finds there has been no further communication to the Petitioner after the assurance given to the Petitioner through Annexure-12, on the operation of the correspondence at Annexure-12 and in the information therein came to be existing. For the opinion of this Court, there is automatic non-operation of the can