Legal principles governing the discretionary power of authorities in allotment cancellations and the necessity for parties to establish justifiable grounds for relief under Article 226.

1. The affidavit-of-service as filed in Court today is taken on record.

2. By filing the instant writ petition, the writ petitioner has prayed for issuance of appropriate writ/writs against the respondents/authorities, more specifically, against the respondent no. 4 for quashing of the letters dated 18.12.2013 and 07.11.2014 whereby and whereunder the said respondent no. 4 intimated the present writ petitioner regarding cancellation of offer of allotment of land at Plot No. AA-IIB-938 in New Town, Kolkata.

3. At the time of hearing, Mr. Lahiri, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner draws attention of this Court to the various annexures of the instant writ petition. It is submitted by Mr. Lahiri that from Page No. 19 of the instant writ petition, it would reveal that the writ petitioner made an application for allotment of land with the Managing Director of the respondent no. 1 under the category MIG Cooperative Housing Society pursuant to a lottery organized by the respondent no. 1/authority.

4. Drawing attention to Page No. 23 of the instant writ petition, being a copy of the letter dated 18.03.2002 as issued by the respondent no. 4/authority, it would reveal that the writ petitioner was intimated that Shri Om Co-operative Housing Society has been allotted the aforementioned plot subject to payment of consideration money in installments and the particulars of the payment schedule have been mentioned in the same memo dated 18.03.2002. It is submitted by Mr. Lahiri that after payment of the first installment, there occurred a delay on the part of the writ petitioner in paying the second installment, which is why, the writ petitioner approached the respondent no. 4/authority for grant of extension of time and the same was allowed by the respondents/authorities subject to payment of interest and, ultimately, on 09.12.2002, the writ petitioner deposited the second installment in terms of the letter of allotment dated 18.03.2002.

5. It is further submitted by Mr. Lahiri that soon thereafter the writ petitioner remained very much busy for registration of the co-operative housing society though with a different name on account of non- availability of the earlier name as would be evident from the endorsement over a memo dated 18.03.2002 at Page No. 31 of the instant writ petition. It is submitted that, ultimately, the writ petitioner obtained the said registration and the same has been intimated to the respondents/authorities by a written communication.

6. It is further submitted by Mr. Lahiri that when the writ petitioner approached the respondents/authorities to make further payment, the same was not accepted and when the writ petitioner sought for information(s) under the RTI Act, 2005 from the respondents/authorities, the respondents/authorities replied to the writ petitioner stating, inter alia, that the aforementioned allotment has been cancelled on

07.11.2014.

7. At this juncture, Mr. Lahiri draws attention of this Court to the letter of cancellation as has been issued in the name of the writ petitioner as would be available at Page Nos. 75 and 76 being copies of the memo dated 18.12.2013 and 07.11.2014. Attention of this Court is also drawn to Page No. 74 being a copy of the letter dated 10.11.2022 as has also been issued by the respondents/authorities in the name of the writ petitioner. At this juncture, Mr. Lahiri requests this Court to look to the address of the writ petitioner as written in the application form of the writ petitioner for allotment of land and the letter of communication by the respondents/authorities in the memo dated 18.03.2002 at Page No. 23 of the instant writ petition vis-à-vis the aforementioned three memos as issued by t