Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sri C. Kumaraswamy, a physically handicapped person employed at the All India Institute of Speech and Hearing, Mysore, applied for allotment of a site under the physically handicapped quota with the Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA). On 02.11.2012, MUDA allotted site No.1212 in Lalitadrinagar-South Layout, Mysore, to the petitioner. The allotment letter required the petitioner to pay 25% of the site cost within 30 days, which he did. However, due to financial constraints, he could not pay the balance amount within the extended period. On 31.05.2013, MUDA issued an endorsement cancelling the allotment and forfeiting the amount paid. The petitioner challenged this endorsement by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking quashing of the endorsement and a direction to MUDA to accept the balance payment and issue possession certificate. The court considered whether MUDA was justified in cancelling the allotment. The petitioner argued that he had paid the initial amount and was ready to pay the balance, but MUDA arbitrarily cancelled the allotment without notice. MUDA contended that the petitioner failed to pay within the stipulated time and that the cancellation was in accordance with the terms. The court held that since MUDA had accepted the initial payment and did not rescind the allotment earlier, the cancellation was arbitrary. Time was not of the essence in the absence of a specific clause. The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the endorsement dated 31.05.2013, and directed MUDA to accept the balance payment with interest as per rules and issue possession certificate and other documents within eight weeks.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Cancellation of Allotment - Time Not Essence - Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act, 1987 - The petitioner, a physically handicapped person, was allotted a site under the physically handicapped quota. He paid the initial 25% of the cost within the stipulated time. However, he could not pay the balance within the extended period due to financial constraints. MUDA cancelled the allotment and forfeited the amount paid. The court held that since MUDA had accepted the initial payment and did not rescind the allotment earlier, the cancellation was arbitrary. Time was not of the essence in the absence of a specific clause. The court directed MUDA to accept the balance payment and issue possession certificate. (Paras 1-5) B) Constitutional Law - Right to Property - Article 300A - Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act, 1987 - The court observed that the right to property is a constitutional right under Article 300A. Cancellation of allotment without affording an opportunity of hearing and without considering the allottee's circumstances violates principles of natural justice. The court held that the impugned endorsement was unsustainable and set it aside. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Mysore Urban Development Authority (MUDA) was justified in cancelling the allotment of a site to a physically handicapped person on the ground that the allottee failed to pay the balance amount within the stipulated period, despite having accepted the initial payment and not having rescinded the allotment earlier.
Final Decision
Writ petition allowed. The endorsement dated 31.05.2013 (Annexure-H) is quashed. MUDA is directed to accept the balance amount due from the petitioner in respect of site No.1212 of Lalitadrinagar-South Layout, Mysore, with interest as per rules, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and to issue possession certificate and other documents forthwith.
Law Points
- Allotment of site
- cancellation of allotment
- physically handicapped quota
- time is not the essence
- acceptance of part payment
- estoppel
- legitimate expectation
- Karnataka Urban Development Authorities Act
- 1987
