http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3  

PETITIONER: JAIPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, JAIPUR

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: CHILDREN’S ACADEMY, JAIPUR & ANR.

DATE OF JUDGMENT03/11/1995

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. HANSARIA B.L. (J)

CITATION:  1995 SCC  Supl.  (4) 284 JT 1995 (8)   346  1995 SCALE  (6)424

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Leave granted.      This appeal  by special  leave arises from the judgment dated November  10, 1993  of the  Division Bench of the High Court passed in D.B. Spl. Appeal No.607 of 1991.      The facts  are not  in dispute. The first respondent is an educational  institution which  made  a  request  to  the appellant for  allotment of  15,000 sq.  yards  of  land  in Malviya Nagar  Scheme. By proceedings dated August 12, 1988, the appellant had informed the respondents that it had fixed the reserved  price at  Rs.160/- per  sq. meter for schools. Clause 5  says that  the lease money can be changed after 15 years but  it will  not exceed  25% of  the reserved  price. Clause 15  of the offer envisages that on non-payment of the demanded amount  within one  month, the  appellant  will  be entitled to  realize interest  and cancel  the allotment. In case of  acceptance, Clause 16 sub-clause [ii] provides that "if you accept the allotment of the above conditions, please deposit the  amount within  one month as under". The details of the amount have been mentioned and the total amount to be deposited was  Rs.20,31,820.90. Admittedly,  the respondents had deposited  only one  lakh. Thereafter,  the Secretary to the appellant  had communicated  through a  letter that  the State Government had granted permission for allotment of the land at  25% of the reserved price to the respondent-Academy by letter  dated August 12, 1988 and that is being returned. Then on  January 12,  1990, pursuant  to a letter written by the respondents  on July  6, 1989, they also reiterated that they were  willing to  allot the  land @  25%  of  the  then prevailing  reserved  price  of  the  land  and  the  amount mentioned thereunder  has been specified. It was also stated expressly thus:           "Please see  that the  cost of  the      land  is  deposited  in  favour  of  the      Secretary,  J.D.A.,  Jaipur,  within  30

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3  

    days from  the date  of  issue  of  this      letter failing  which the  offer  stands      cancelled."      The  allotment   order  dated   August  12,   1988  was thereafter cancelled.  Thus  the  previous  allotment  stood cancelled  and   fresh  offer   was  made   subject  to  the respondents depositing  the amount  stated thereunder within 30 days  from the  date of  issue of the letter. Admittedly, the amount  was not  deposited, except writing a letter that the Rajasthan  Urban Improvement  Trust [Disposal  of  Urban Land] Rules,  1974  envisage  that  50%  of  the  prevailing reserved price was to be paid and the appellant’s demand was illegal.           Rule which  has  been  relied  upon      reads thus:           "No land  shall be  allotted for  a      price less  than the sanctioned reserved      price  except   for  categories  covered      under Rule 17."      Rule 17 provides as under:           "Lands for schools and other public      and  charitable   institutions  may   be      allotted  on   payment  of  50%  of  the      sanctioned reserved  price or  with  the      prior permission of the State Government      free of  any charge  or at  concessional      rates."      It would thus be seen that it may be incumbent upon the appellant to  allot the  land but  in case  they  choose  to allot, they  may allot  on payment  of 50% of the sanctioned reserved price.  It would  be seen  that in the first offer, the appellant  had offered  land @ Rs.160/- per sq. meter as reserved price and the respondents had not complied with the same. As stated earlier, the offer stood cancelled. In 1990, when a  second offer  was made,  even then  also, it was not complied with. The respondents have relied upon the circular issued  by  the  Government  amplifying  as  to  under  what circumstances allotment  may be  made at a lesser price. The circular dated  October 13,  1987  is  only  guidelines  for disposal of the lands for educational, religious, charitable or public  institutions at  concessional rate  of 25% as the reserved  price,   but  the   instructions  were  to  ensure uniformity in  the allotment  and charging  the  rates.  The offer had  been given  charging @  Rs.160/- per sq. meter in the first  instance and  the respondents  had not  paid  the amount except  Rs.1  lakh.  Had  they  paid  the  amount  at reserved price and claimed refund at 50% or 25%, as the case may, as per their own case, something could be said in their favour. But  unfortunately they  did not  accept  the  offer which was  conditional. They had chosen to deposit only Rs.1 lakh  as   against  Rs.21  lakhs.  As  stated  earlier,  the cancellation order  was not  challenged. When  a fresh offer was made then also the respondents had not complied with the offer; instead  they went  to the  court for  a direction to give them  allotment at concessional rate of 25% of original value at  Rs.160 per  sq. meter. The Division Bench had thus erroneously directed  the allotment  on payment  of  25%  of Rs.160/- per sq. yard, which offer was no longer subsisting, since it  was already  cancelled. Under these circumstances, the order of the High Court is clearly illegal.      The appeal  is accordingly  allowed. The  writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3