Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 16984
DELHI HIGH COURT
SATPAL SINGH – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. – Respondent
WP(C)-14984_2023
The provisions of Paragraph XXVI of SO No. 03/2015 empower the Allotment Officer to cancel the allotment of a government quarter if the allottee violates certain conditions, including unauthorized construction and failure to maintain harmonious relations with neighbors.
Headnote:
QUARTER ALLOTMENT - CANCELLATION - UNAUTHORIZED CONSTRUCTION - HARMONIOUS RELATIONS - [SO No. 03/2015, PARA XXVI]
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, an ASI in Delhi Police, was allotted a government quarter in 1990. In 2021, a Show Cause Notice was issued to him for unauthorized construction and violation of harmonious relations with neighbors. The allotment was canceled by the Competent Authority and upheld by the Appellate Authority. The petitioner challenged the orders before the Tribunal, which dismissed the OA and review application. The petitioner then filed a writ petition in the High Court.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court upheld the Tribunal's order, holding that the petitioner had violated Paragraph XXVI of SO No. 03/2015 by carrying out unauthorized construction and failing to maintain harmonious relations with neighbors. The Court found that the Show Cause Notice had fairly notified the petitioner of the allegations against him and that the Competent Authority had sufficient evidence to draw the conclusions against him.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner had violated Paragraph XXVI of SO No. 03/2015 by carrying out unauthorized construction and failing to maintain harmonious relations with neighbors?2. Whether the Show Cause Notice had fairly notified the petitioner of the allegations against him?3. Whether the Competent Authority had sufficient evidence to draw the conclusions against him?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Paragraph XXVI of SO No. 03/2015 empowers the Allotment Officer to cancel the allotment of a government quarter if the allottee raises an unauthorized construction, uses the residence for any purpose other than for which it is meant, tampers with the electric or water connection, violates the terms and conditions of the allotment, uses the residence for any purpose which the Allotment Officer considers to be improper, conducts himself/herself in a manner which in his/her opinion is prejudicial to the maintenance of harmonious relations with his/her neighbors, or knowingly furnishes incorrect information in any application or written statement with a view to securing the allotment.2. The Show Cause Notice issued to the petitioner fairly notified him of the allegations against him, including the unauthorized construction and the violation of harmonious relations with neighbors.3. The Competent Authority had sufficient evidence to draw the conclusions against the petitioner, including the photographs of the unauthorized construction and the complaints from neighbors.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed.
W.P.(C) 14984/2023
Page 1 of 17
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment reserved on: 21.11.2023
Judgment delivered on: 04.12.2023
+
W.P.(C) 14984/2023 & CM APPL. 59828-59829/2023
SATPAL SINGH
..... Petitioner
Through:
Mr.Mehmood Pracha and Mr.Jatin
Bhatt, Advocates with Petitioner-in-
person.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
..... Respondents
Through:
Mr.Pradeep Kumar Jha, Sr. Panel
Counsel
with
Mr.Rahul
Kumar
Sharma, G.P. for UOI.
Mrs.Avnish
Ahlawat,
Standing
Counsel with Mrs.Taniya Ahlawat,
Mr.Nitesh
Kumar
Singh,
Ms.Laavanya
Kaushik,
Ms.Aliza
Alam and Mr.Mohnish Sehrawat,
Advocates.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
J U D G M E N T
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J.
1.
The challenge in this writ petition is to orders dated February 24,
2023, in OA No. 3649/2022 and order dated November 03, 2023 in RA
No. 50/2023, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal
Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter, referred to as the „Tribunal‟), whereby the
OA and review application were dismissed. In nutshell, petitioner preferred
Digitally Signed
By:DINESH CHANDRA
Signing Date:04.12.2023
18:16:59
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 14984/2023
Page 2 of 17
the OA for setting aside order dated July 21, 2021 cancelling the allotment
of Quarter No. J-3, Type-II, NPL, allotted to him and upheld by the
Appellate Authority vide order dated November 16, 2022.
2.
In brief, petitioner who is posted as an ASI in Delhi Police was
allotted Govt. Quarter No. J-3, Type-II, NPL, Delhi w.e.f. September 01,
1990. A Show Cause Notice dated February 12, 2021 was issued to the
Petitioner by the Allotment Officer, as to why allotment of aforesaid quarter
should not be cancelled pursuant to two complaints submitted by his
neighbour Sh. S. K. Singh, then DCP/Ops. & Communication, regarding
unauthorized construction carried by raising illegal boundary-wall on the
back side of the said Govt. Quarter and occupying pavement opposite the
House No. E-5 Type-IV in occupation of Sh. S. K. Singh. Petitioner is also
stated to have unauthorizedly opened a gate on Pambari Road on the back
side of the said quarter, whereas the legal entry was from the other side as
recorded in spot inspection conducted on January 14, 2021. Further,
petitioner kept flower pots / plants over the unfinished boundary wall but an
iron gate was still found affixed along with bricks on the back side of the
said Govt. Quarter, thereby violating the provisions of Paragraph XXVI of
SO No. 03/2015.
3.
In response to the Show Cause Notice dated February 12, 2021,
petitioner forwarded reply letters dated February 16, 2021 and February 19,
2021, averring that he had been residing in the said flat since 1990 with the
family members and the gate is in existence since the date of allotment.
Similarly, gates were stated to have been erected at the back side of several
quarters in blocks A to P in the complex. The complaint is stated to have
Digitally Signed
By:DINESH CHANDRA
Signing Date:04.12.2023
18:16:59
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 14984/2023
Page 3 of 17
been filed by Sh. S. K. Singh, DCP despite unauthorized construction
existing in the accommodation occupied by him. In the additional reply vide
letter dated February 19, 2021, stand was taken that the accommodation had
been earlier allotted to his father and on his superannuation, the same was
regularised in favour of the petitioner in the year 1990. Further, the process
of construction of wall was undertaken at instance of wife of Sh. S. K.
Singh, since the land was earlier covered by a hedge and the plants and pots
were placed on the hedge to protect his family from stray animals.
Allegations of high handedness were made against the family of Sh. S. K.
Singh on casteist lines claiming that the petitioner belongs to a weaker
section of the society.
4.
DCP, Genl. Admn., Delhi vide or
