HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writs No. 4938/1999

Raj Pal Dhangar son of Shri Sahi Ram aged about 34 years,

resident of 4/757, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur

----Petitioner

Versus

1. Rajasthan Housing Board through its Secretary, Jyoti Nagar,

Jaipur.

2. Nagar Nigam through its Commissioner, Head-quarter at

Jaipur.

3. Shri Pradeep Chhogani son of not known resident of 2/683-C,

Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur.

4. Shri Heera Bijlani son of not known, resident of 2/683,

Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur

----Respondent

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Hemant Sharma on behalf of

Mr. Sarthak Rastogi

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Kamlakar Sharma with

Mr. Asad Ali, respondent No. 3 and 4

Mr. V. P. Mathur for Rajasthan Housing

Board

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH

Order

26/07/2018

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the

following prayers:-

“(a) the writ petition filed by the

petitioner may kindly be allowed and the

relevant record may kindly be called for and

be perused by this Hon’ble Court, if so

pleases;

(b) by an appropriate writ, order or direction,

the auction of plots No. 2-SP-3 and 2-SP-4, in

favour of private respondents may kindly be

quashed and set aside and the respondents

may be directed to remove the construction

which has already been made on the land to

(2 of 4)

[CW-4938/1999]

restore the land in its original position and to

leave it open as a common facility.

(c) Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court

may deem fit just and proper in the facts and

circumstances of the case, same may kindly

be granted in favour of the petitioner.

(d) cost of the writ petition may kindly be

awarded in favour of the petitioner.”

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent

Housing Board has wrongly auctioned the Plot No. 3-SP-3 and 3-

SP-4 vide auction notice dated 4.02.1999

Counsel further submits that the land where the aforesaid

plots are situated is a facility land earmarked by the Rajasthan

Housing Board as such the action of the respondent in auctioning

the land for the housing purpose is bad in the eye of law.

Counsel further submits that during pendency of the writ

petition, the respondents have constructed houses and the same

are being used by them for commercial activity.

Counsel further submits that the private respondent have

constructed houses contrary to the building by laws, lastly prayed

for demolishing the houses and cancel the allotments.

Counsel for the respondent No. 1 submits that the area

where the plots were auctioned never marked as facility area

rather the same was an open land where the said plots were

carved out by the Rajasthan Housing Board according to the

scheme of Act more particularly counsel relied upon para No. 11 of

reply to the writ petition which reads as under:-

“11. That the submissions made in

para 11 of the writ petition are denied. It is

emphatically denied that the answering

respondent did not follow the procedure

before earmarking the Plot No. 3-SP-3 and

3-SP-4 for the purpose of constructing

H.I.G. houses. The answering respondent

convened the meeting of the Project

Committee and on the basis of the

recommendations of the Committee decision

was taken that these vacant plots may be

(3 of 4)

[CW-4938/1999]

converted into H.I.G. plots. Such decision

was taken in respect of all the 4 plots. It is

further denied that the land in question is

being used for public purpose by the

inhabitants. The vacant land is not a

common facility land and it was never

marked as common facility land. On the

contrary, for common facility the land which

have been marked as Park, Community

Centre, Land for dispensary, Post Office etc.

are ear-marked separately. The answering

respondent is well within its jurisdiction in

bringing minor changes in the Scheme. The

petitioner has wrongly stated that the land

use has been