In a crucial ruling by the Supreme Court of India, a longstanding land allotment dispute between Smt. Kasturibai Sukharam Khandelwal Trust and Shri Khandelwal Trust has been settled. The judgment brings clarity to the allocation of land for a community hall and emphasizes adherence to legal regulations. #LegalJudgment #SupremeCourt #LandDispute #Trusts
Facts
- Authority initially allotted land to the Trust and another trust of the same community at the same place on the same day
- After realizing the error, the Authority revisited its decision and issued a new advertisement for land allotment
- Appellant Trust submitted an application in response to the new advertisement
- Original appellant had constructed a community hall used for public and community purposes
- Division Bench of the High Court was unjustified in reverting the decision back to the Authority at a belated stage
- Resolution no. 21 dated 11 February, 1991 cancelled the application of the 2 respondent and confirmed the allotment in favor of the appellant Trust.
- The Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the writ petition under its order dated 1 February, 2001 which was challenged in letters patent appeal.
- The Division Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh disposed of the writ petition under its order dated 4 November, 2008 with a direction to reconsider the allotment of land after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties and assess the comparative assessment and merit of the appellant Trust and 2 respondent.
- Appellant Trust submitted an application pursuant to an advertisement inviting applications dated 7 September, 1989, and no application was submitted by the 2 respondent.
- The authority rectified the mistake of allotting land to the 2 respondent by cancelling the letter of allotment and confirming it in favor of the appellant Trust under Resolution No. 21 dated 11 February, 1991.
- The decision of the Authority was in conformity with Chapter III of Disposal Regulations, 1987.
- Interference in writ appeal was considered not justiciable and deserved to be interfered with by the Court.
- The 2 respondent did not appear to be interested in the proceedings to put forth his claim.
Also Read: Tower Infotech Ltd. Bail Order Appeal
Arguments
- Both the appellants (Smt. Kasturibai Sukharam Khandelwal Trust and Shri Khandelwal Trust) are dissatisfied with the judgment dated 4 November, 2008.
- Appellant Smt. Kasturibai Sukharam Khandelwal Trust and respondent Shri Khandelwal Trust are registered public trusts.
- 2nd respondent did not submit any application for land allotment as per the advertisement
- Appellant Trust’s application was in order and allotted 50,000 sq. ft. for community hall
- 2nd respondent’s application was erroneously processed and 30,000 sq. ft. was allotted
- Authority confirmed the 50,000 sq. ft. allotment to the Trust and rejected 2nd respondent’s application
- No failure by the Trust to fulfill conditions for allotment
- 2nd respondent approached High Court citing lack of natural justice in cancellation of their allotment
- Division Bench directed Authority to revisit allotment decision
Also Read: Priority of Employees’ Dues in Asset Sale: SARFAESI Act vs. Land Revenue Code
Analysis
- Respondent has not submitted any application for allotment of land as per the advertisement dated 7 September, 1989.
- Authority had no justification to consider the non-compliant application of the respondent.
- Scrutiny of the application for land allotment was not open to the respondent due to non-compliance.
- Calling upon the respondent for a hearing would serve no purpose given the circumstances.
- The respondent has chosen not to participate in the proceedings, indicating a lack of interest in pursuing the alleged allotment claim.
- Allocation to LIC irrelevant to inter se dispute between trusts.
- No justification for involving LIC in the proceedings.
- No purpose served by revisiting matter when lease deed executed, construction done, and respondent disinterested.
- Both appeals succeed and are allowed.
Also Read: Landmark Judgement on Consumer Rights in Healthcare Sector
Decision
- The Division Bench of the High Court’s judgment dated 4 November, 2008 has been overturned.
- No costs are to be incurred.
- Any pending applications are now resolved.
Case Title: SMT. KASTURIBAI SUKHARAM KHANDELWAL TRUST Vs. INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY .
Case Number: C.A. No.-005308-005308 / 2010
