IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.2538 of 1994
===========================================================
Kamta Prasad Singh, son of late Chandra Bhan Singh, resident of Village Pauna,
P.S. Sandesh, District- Bhojpur.
…. …. Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Bihar State Housing Board, Patna through its Managing Director, Patna.
2. The Chairman, Bihar State Housing Board, Patna.
3. The Managing Director, Bihar State Housing Board, Patna.
…. …. Respondent/s
===========================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Dr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rajeev Nayan Singh, Advocate
===========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA
ORAL JUDGMENT
24th June 2011
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Learned Advocate Mr. Rajiv Nayan Singh is not present on
call.
The Petitioner, a resident of Village Pauna, District Bhojpur
has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution to
enforce the right of allotment of a plot of land in the housing project of
Bihar State Housing Board (hereinafter referred to as “the Board”) at
Digha, Patna.
It is the claim of the petitioner that on 15th December1972,
the petitioner had applied for allotment of a plot of land in the aforesaid
housing project. The petitioner also paid the Earnest Money of
Rs.2,000/- on 18th July 1980. In the present petition filed in the year
1994, it is the grievance of the petitioner that though he had made
application as early as in the year 1972, his name was not included in
Patna High Court CWJC No.2538 of 1994 dt.24-06-2011
2
the list of allottees published in a Newspaper pursuant to the direction
issued by this Court in CWJC No. 3991 of 1987. The petitioner has,
therefore, prayed that he be allotted a plot of land in the aforesaid
housing project. We are afraid, the claim made by the petitioner is
totally misconceived. Mere application for allotment of plot or payment
of Earnest Money did not create an indefeasible right to allotment of
land. It is evident that the Board is not capable of Satisfying the need of
entire populace. In limited land available to the Board, all applicants
cannot be accommodated.
But it is the responsibility of the Board to inform the
applicants accordingly, and to refund the Earnest Money deposited by
such applicants. Evidently, in the present case, not only the petitioner
has not been allotted the plot of land, the Earnest Money deposited by
him also has not been refunded to the petitioner.
If the Board has not allotted the land to the petitioner, the
Board is under obligation to refund the amount of Earnest Money
Deposit.
For the aforesaid reasons, we direct the respondent Bihar State
Housing Board to refund the amount of Earnest Money Deposit made
by the petitioner with statutory interest within eight weeks from today.
Subject to the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. The
parties will bear their own cost.
Registry will send the writ forthwith.
( R.M. Doshit, CJ )
(Birendra Prasad Verma, J)
Rahman/
Patna High Court CWJC No.2538 of 1994 dt.24-06-2011
3