JUDGMENT
R.L. Anand, J.
1. Dr. Manmohan Singh Khanna has filed the present civil writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India against the State of Punjab, respondent No. 1, and the Amritsar Improvement Trust, Amritsar, respondent No. 2 for the issuance of a writ of mandamus praying that both the respondents be directed to deliver the physical possession of plot No. B-89 measuring 250 sq. yards, which was allotted to him vide resolution No. 307 dated 29.11.1979 passed by respondent No. 2 in the Ajnala Road Area Development Scheme, Amritsar.
2. The case set up by the petitioner is that in the year 1979 while he was working as Assistant Professor in the Government Medical College, Amritsar, he became eligible under the Improvement Trust Rules of 1975 to apply for a residential plot of 250 sq. yds. in one of the approved or sanctioned schemes and he moved an application to the Trust for the allotment of a residential plot measuring 250 sq. yds. out of the quota reserved for the Govt. employees. In a meeting of the trust held on 29.11.1979, resolution No. 307 was passed and the trust decided to allot plots to 47 applicants including the petitioner on reserved price. The petitioner was allotted a residential plot measuring 250 sq. yds. bearing No. B-89 in Ajnala Road Area Development Scheme, at the reserved price of Rs. 78/- per sq. yd., and the petitioner was further directed to deposit the earnest money to the tune of Rs. 2000/-. These directions were complied on 2.11.1979. The allotment case of the various applicants including the petitioner was sent to the Govt. for approval. Before the approval could be granted new Govt. came into power and it decided to cancel all the allotments made by the previous Govt. irrespective of the merits of the case. In the month of September, 1980 the Govt, informed all the Administrator of the Improvement Trust that all the recommendations made by the former Chairman of the Improvement Trust, for the allotment of the plots to various persons out of the Govt quota had been considered and rejected by the New Govt. Against this blanket order of the Goyt. the petitioner approached this Court by way of Civil Writ Petition No. 1504 of 1983 and challenged the blanket order of the State Government and the subsequent order of the Trust whereby the allotment of the plot in favour of the petitioner was cancelled. That petition was disposed of along with other writ petitions. However, main order was passed in Civil Writ Petition No. 1500 of 1983. The decisions given in the writ petitions were based on the decision given in the Civil Writ Petition No. 611 of 1982 decided on 24.5.1983. Letters Patent Appeal was filed against the judgment dated 24.5.1983 which was dismissed. Special Leave Petition was also dismissed. Thereafter, the petitioner along with others made a representation to the Chairman, Improvement Trust stating therein that they filed the Civil Writ Petition in the High Court which was allowed and it was ordered that he be allotted residential plot measuring 250 sq. yds. as decided vide resolution No. 307 dated 29.11.1979 and plot No. B-89 be allotted. It has been stated in the writ petition that the petitioner was not given physical possession of plot No. B-89 in spite of the representation. Now the case of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that after quashing the orders of the State Govt. as well as of the Improvement Trust plot No. B-89 should be allotted to him as the Amritsar Improvement Trust is bound by the principle of promissory estoppel particularly when the petitioner had already deposited earnest money an amount of Rs. 2000/- and the plot is still standing in the name of the petitioner in the record of the trust. The matter had already been adjudicated in civil writ petition No. 1504 of 1993 finally. With the above averments, the petitioner Manmohan Singh has prayed the allowing of the writ petition as prayed for.
3. Notice of the writ petition was given to the respondents who filed written statement and denied the allegations justifying the stand taken by the Trust.
4. I have heard Shri H.S. Giani, Advocate, and Shri Gurinder Singh, Advocate, on behalf of the petitioner and Shri P.S. Chhina, DAG (Punjab), for the respondent No. 1 and Shri T.S. Gujral, Advocate, for the respondent No. 2 and with their assistance have gone through the record of this case.
5. The record of the present case would show that Civil Writ Petition No. 611/82, Baldhir Kaur v. State of Punjab was disposed of by this Court on 24.5.1983 and the challenge was given to the blanket order passed in September, 1980 by the State Government by which the decision regarding allotment of the residential plots to the various applicants was set aside and rejected. This decision was challenged by Smt. Baldhir Kaur and this Court vide judgment dated 24.5.1983 set aside the decision of the Government on the ground that the order is arbitrary and violative of the prpvisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. On the basis of this judgment several writ petitions including Writ Petition No. 1504 filed by the present writ petitioner Dr. Manmohan Singh Khanna was disposed of and the decision was given in the Writ petition No. 1500 Dr. Mukthiar Singh v. State of Punjab. All the writ petitions including writ petition No. 1504 were allowed by placing reliance upon the judgment dated 24.5.1983 passed in Civil Writ Petition No. 611 of 1982. The effect of the law of the writ petitions would be that the decisions of the Trust dated 29.11.1979 stands revived by which the petitioner was allotted residential plot measuring 250 sq. yds. bearing No. B-89 in Ajnala Road Area Development Scheme. Once there is an allotment by a statutory body like the Improvement Trust, it has to stand upon its commitment and it cannot unilaterally withhold the further procedure for the allotment and handing over the possession to the allottee, if he is ready to comply with all the terms and conditions of the allotment and the decision dated 29.11.1979.
6. Now the point for determination is whether respondent No. 1 State of Punjab has the powers to decline the decision of the Trust taken on 29.11.1979 vide which plot No. B-89 measuring 250 sq. yds. was principally agreed to be allotted to the petitioner. The Trust is a statutory body and it has the powers to regulate a scheme for the allotment of residential plots. The Govt. does not come into picture. There is no provision under the Town Improvement Trust Act vide which the approval of the State Government was essentially required by the Trust before taking the decision with respect to the allotment of the plot. It is not disputed that till today plot No. B- 89 in the record of the Trust has been shown to be allotted to the present petitioner. This allotment has not been cancelled either by the Trust or the State Government.
7. The learned counsel for the Improvement Trust is placing reliance on the judgment delivered in Civil Writ Petition No. 7080 of 1988 vide which the persons similarly situated like the present petitioner filed writ and his writ was declined. However, this authority is not applicable to the facts in hand because in the cited case, respondent Authorities passed individual orders which were passed by the State Govt. on different dates and by which the approval to the allotment of the plots bad been declined for the detailed reasons mentioned therein. In the present case, no such order has been passed by the Trust or by the Government. Therefore, the judgment passed in Civil Writ Petition No. 3675 of 1988 Dr. Gurpartap Singh v. State of Punjab cannot be construed for the advantage of the respondent-authorities.
8. In the light of the above discussions, the present writ petition is allowed and a writ of mandamus is hereby issued against respondent Nos. 1 and 2 directing them to allot and give physical possession of plot No. B-89 measuring 250 sq. yds. at the reserved price in the Ajnala Road Area Development Scheme, Amritsar in terms of resolution No. 307 dated 29.11.1979 and these, directions must be carried out by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 authorities within 3 months from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
