Chandigarh Housing Board vs Permanent Lok Adalat And Another on 13 October, 2009

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                         AT CHANDIGARH


                   Civil Writ Petition No.15727 of 2009
                   Date of decision: 13th October, 2009


Chandigarh Housing Board
                                                                ... Petitioner
                                  Versus
Permanent Lok Adalat and another
                                                             ... Respondents


CORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

Present:    Mr. Indresh Goel, Advocate for the petitioner.


KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL)

Present writ petition has been filed by Chandigarh Housing

Board against the decision of Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility

Services), U.T. Chandigarh.

Smt. Girija S. Nayyar had applied, in pursuance of an

advertisement, for allotment of one bedroom flat in a four storey building in

Sector 49, Chandigarh. Petitioner had advertised 160 one bed room four

storeyed flats in Sector 49, Chandigarh, out of which 142 flats were to be

allotted to general public, 8 for to the Oustees under “The Chandigarh

Allotment of Dwelling Units to the oustees of Chandigarh, 1996 Scheme”

and 10 were reserved for different categories. Smt. Girija S. Nayyar

succeeded and later her allotment was sought to be cancelled on the

ground that along with her, her husband S.K. Nayyar had also applied.

This according to the petitioner, contravenes Sub-Clause (5) of Clause III

of the advertisement, which says that only one member of the family can

apply.

Civil Writ Petition No.15727 of 2009 2

Smt. Girija S. Nayyar had filed an appeal before the

Chairman, Chandigarh Housing Board. During the pendency of the said

appeal, an application was filed by the applicant before the Lok Adalat to

resolve the dispute. An effort was made by the Lok Adalat to resolve the

dispute, but having failed, the Lok Adalat invoked section 22 C (8) of the

Legal Services Authority Act, 1987.

I have perused the order passed by the Permanent Lok

Adalat. It is a well reasoned, just and appropriate order, whereby an effort

has been made to allay the hardship, which the applicant was facing. On a

technical ground that the husband and wife both had applied and the wife

succeeded, therefore the allotment is to be cancelled, was held to be

unjust and discriminatory, because in the case of one Renu Bala, the

Board had proceeded to allot the flat.

Mr. Indresh Goel, appearing for the petitioner, submits that

one wrong cannot make another wrong good. He further states that

breach of condition, in itself, will disentitle the respondent applicant from

allotment of the flat. Thirdly, learned counsel says that since the appeal

has been pending, the relief granted by the Lok Adalat cannot be

dispensed with.

The Permanent Lok Adalat had taken into consideration that

both husband and wife in their affidavits had disclosed that they have filed

application form for allotment of the flat. The Lok Adalat also took into

consideration that respondent applicant fulfilled the eligibility criteria and is

bonafide resident of Chandigarh. The Lok Adalat also concluded that the

mistake on the part of the applicant was not that grave that the allotment

should be cancelled and the 10 per cent amount be deducted from the

allotment money.

Civil Writ Petition No.15727 of 2009 3

I do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the

Permanent Lok Adalat and there is no justification to cause interference.

Hence, the order passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat is affirmed and

present writ petition is disposed of.

[KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA]
JUDGE
October 13, 2009
rps