IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 18067 of 2007(A)
1. K.A.MUHAMMED ISMAIL,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD,
... Respondent
2. THE REGIONAL ENGINEER,
3. SMT. A.SAJITHA, (UDC),
4. SMT. V.AJITHAKUMARI,
For Petitioner :SRI.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON (SR.)
For Respondent :POOVAPPALLY M.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,SC.KSHB
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :13/12/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J
--------------------------------------
W.P.(C).No. 18067 OF 2007
-------------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of December, 2010
JUDGMENT
With effect from 20.4.1983, petitioner has been in
continuous service of the Kerala State Housing Board as 1st Grade
Draftsman on a provisional basis. While continuing as such, in the
meeting held on 30.12.1997 the Board passed Ext.P1 resolution
to regularize the service of the employees mentioned therein
including the petitioner with effect from 1.1.1998. Subsequently,
the petitioner got regularly recruited through P.S.C and was
appointed as such on 21.3.2001 and is still continuing in the
services of the Board.
2. Clause 6(3)(c) of the Kerala State Housing Board
Regulations for new Registrations for allotment of house-
plots/plots with building / and flats (apartments) in cities, towns
and other urban centres of Kerala, 1986, reads as follows:-
Clause 6(3)(c):- ” 5% of the house plots/plot
with building/flats (apartments) shall be reserved
for the Employees of the Housing Board in the order
of registration”
W.P.(C).No. 18067 OF 2007
2
3. Accordingly, the petitioner got himself registered and
applied for allotment of Plot No.S-3 in the Ambalanagar Extension
Housing Scheme. His application was considered and Ext.P2
order dated 15.12.2000 was issued, provisionally allotting the
plot to the petitioner. Complaining that final order allotment was
delayed, petitioner approached the Kerala Lokayuktha, in that
proceedings the 3rd respondent, another employee of the Board,
got herself impleaded and staked her claim for allotment. The
complaint was disposed of by Ext.P3 order directing the Board to
consider the rival claims and pass orders in the matter.
Subsequent to Ext.P3 order, reiterating his claims, the petitioner
submitted Ext.P4 representation to the Board. Finally, the Board
passed Ext.P6 order, cancelling Ext.P2 order of provisional
allotment and re-allotting the plot to the 4th respondent, yet
another employee of the Board.
4. Petitioner challenged Ext.P6 order before this Court by
filing O.P.No.6170/2003. It is stated that at the admission stage,
this Court stayed further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P6 order
and finally the original petition was disposed of by Ext.P8
judgment relegating the petitioner to make a representation to
W.P.(C).No. 18067 OF 2007
3
the Board and the Board was asked to consider the claim.
Accordingly, petitioner submitted Ext.P9 representation. In that
representation referring to the claim raised by respondents 3 and
4, it was stated that :-
” It is brought to the notice of the Board that
Smt.A.Sajitha who got impleaded before
Lokayuktha, in complaint No.855/2002 and opposed
the allotment of the plot to me has already
constructed a residential house in Plot No.S.50 of
Nalanchira Housing Accommodation Scheme of the
Board (Thilak Nagar) it is also brought to the notice
of the Board that Smt.V.Ajithakumari does not
require the above housing plot. It may be noted
that on the basis of the interim order issued by the
Hon’ble High Court on 21.2.2003 in CMP
No.10870/2003 in O.P.No.6170/2003 plot No.S3 of
Ambala Nagar Housing (Extension) scheme has not
been allotted to anybody so far. Hence I am entitled
for allotment of the above plot under Clause 6(c) of
the “Kerala State Housing Board Regulations for
new Registrations for allotment of House plots/plots
with building/ and flats (apartments) in Cities, and
Towns other Urban centres of Kerala 1986.”
5. Therefore, his case was that respondents 3 and 4 were
ineligible for allotment and that among the rival claimants, he
alone was the eligible person. Finally, the Board issued Ext.P10
order stating that among the applicants, 3rd respondent was the
senior most and on that basis, the plot was allotted to the 3rd
respondent. It is this order which is under challenge in this writ
W.P.(C).No. 18067 OF 2007
4
petition.
6. Therefore, when the Board issued Ext.P10 order, there
were three claimants and among the claimants, the allotment was
given to the 3rd respondent based on her seniority.
7. In this writ petition notice has been issued and served on
all the respondents. However, there is no appearance on behalf
of the respondents 3 and 4.
8. As far as the 3rd respondent, in whose favour allotment
was made is concerned, in Ext.P9 representation, it was the
specific case of the petitioner that she having constructed a
house, has become ineligible for allotment under the quota
reserved for the employees of the Housing Board. That apart,
when this case was taken up for hearing, the learned senior
counsel appearing for the petitioner produced before me Order
No.HBO.No.23/Adl(b)698/02 dated 27.1.2010, issued by the
Secretary of the Board, relieving the 3rd respondent from service
of the Board for taking up employment in the Education
Department. Therefore, at any rate, the 3rd respondent, who has
ceased to be an employee of the Board, has no claim for
allotment of the housing plot, in the quota ear marked for the
W.P.(C).No. 18067 OF 2007
5
employees of the Board.
9. As far as the 4th respondent is concerned, not only that
her claim was rejected by Ext.P10, but also she did not stake her
claim by challenging the said order. She is not even contesting
this writ petition also. This means that she has accepted Ext.P10
order and therefore can have no surviving grievance. In that view
of the matter, the only claim left is that petitioner, who continues
to be an employee of the Board.
10. In the result, I quash Ext.P10 and direct that fresh
order shall be passed by the Board, on the application made by
the petitioner for allotment of the plot.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE
dmb