S.V.ASGAONKAR vs. MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGN.DEVT.AUTH.

1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3488 OF 2018 (ARISING OUT OF SLP(C)NO.26056 OF 2012) S.V. ASGAONKAR & ORS.                       … APPELLANTS VERSUS THE MUMBAI METROPOLITAN REGION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS.         … RESPONDENTS J U D G M E N T ASHOK BHUSHAN, J. This   appeal   has   been   filed   against   judgment   dated 19.06.2012   of   the   High   Court   of   Bombay   by   which   Writ Petition No.8224 of 2011 filed by the appellants has been dismissed. 2. Brief facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are: The Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority has   been   constituted   under   the     Mumbai   Metropolitan Signature Not Verified Region Development Authority Act, 1974. The Authority has Digitally signed by NIDHI AHUJA Date: 2018.04.09 17:10:36 IST Reason: framed Regulations, namely,   Mumbai Metropolitan Region 2 Development   Authority   (Disposal   of   Land)   Regulations, 1977   which   were   also   amended   vide   Notification   dated 29.04.1997.   The   Authority   in   accordance   with   the Regulations is empowered to dispose of its land.  3. The appellants were employees of  Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'Authority'). The Resolution dated 07.06.1997 was passed by the Authority granting permission to allot the land of Authority situated at Chitalsar Manpada Village, District Thane   admeasuring   about   13,700   sq.mtr.   to   the   proposed Co­operative   Housing   Society   of   the   employees   of   the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority for the purpose of construction of houses on lease hold basis for a period of 80 years. The Resolution by condition No.3 provided that Housing Society will have to pay an amount at the rate of Rs.1400/­ per sq. mtr. for a period of 80 years as premium. Letter dated 05.11.1998 was issued to the proposed Society informing about the Resolution dated 07.06.1997 and the terms and conditions thereof. A Co­ operative   Housing   Society   of   the   employees   of   the Authority   was   registered   on   25.06.1999   under   the 3 Maharashtra Co­operative Societies Act, 1960. The Society in reference to the above wrote letters dated 23.07.1999, 19.11.1999 and further dated 09.12.1999 wherein it made three requests, namely: (a) The rate of Rs.1400/­ per sq. mtr. is the rate of developed plots and, therefore, the land falling under road and compulsory open spaces should be made available free of cost. (b) Instead of insisting on payment of the premium in   one   or   two   instalments,   the   Society   may   be permitted to pay the land cost in yearly instalments spread over 10 to 15 years. (c) Pending   the   final   decision,   advance   possession of   the   plot   of   land   be   given   to   the   Society   by charging a token amount @ 2% of the estimated cost of the land. 4. On   09.07.1999,   the   Government   of   Maharashtra   had issued Government Resolution pertaining to the Govt. land to   be   allotted   to   the   Housing   Society.   The   document contained   various   terms   and   conditions   under   which Government   land   can   be   allotted   to   the   Co­operative 4 Housing   Society.   The   letter   dated   09.12.1999   of   the Society   was   not   favourably   responded   by   the   Authority. Again letter dated 26.02.2001 was sent by the Society to the   Authority   requesting   to   put   up   a   proposal   for consideration of the Authority in the forthcoming meeting for allotment of land to Society on similar terms as that of the allotment of land to the MMRDA Class­IV Employees Co­operative   Housing   Society.   Reminder   dated   27.04.2001 was again sent by the Society.   The Authority vide its letter dated 03.05.2001 wrote to the Society where the Authority  requested the Society to go through the terms and conditions given in the Resolution dated 09.07.1999 and   communicate   its   willingness   so   that   further   action be taken in the matter.   Copy of Government Resolution dated   09.07.1999   was   forwarded   to   the   Society   to communicate its willingness as per terms and conditions given in Government Resolution dated 09.07.1999. 5. The   Authority   in   its   meeting   dated   01.09.2003 resolved   to   allot   the   land   to   the   Society   as   per   the terms and conditions dated 09.07.1999. In the Resolution it was further stated that the allotment will be made at the rate of Rs.2500/­ per sq.mtr. In the above respect, 5 the   condition   No.(c)   contained   in   the   Resolution   dated 07.06.1997   was   modified.   A   letter   dated   11.12.2003   was issued by the Authority to the Society relating to grant of   land   area   13,700   sq.mtr.   as   per   Resolution   dated 01.09.2003. The letter further stated that the list of eligible members may be approved by submitting proposal with necessary proofs in that respect and verifying the eligibility   of   members,   the   built   up   area   will   be allotted to the members and thereafter possession of land will be given by executing lease. The Society vide letter dated 10.06.2004 submitted final list of eligible members as   requested   by   the   Authority   as   on   11.12.2003.   In response to the letter of the Society, further, letter dated   09.12.2005   was   issued   to   the   Society   informing allotment   of   land   to   the   Society   admeasuring   10,700 sq.mtr.   with   total   premium   to   be   paid,   along   with   the letter list of non­eligible members with remarks “not in the service on the date of LOI” including the names of the appellants was also furnished. 6. The   appellants   aggrieved   by   the   aforesaid communication   dated   09.12.2005   filed   Writ   Petition 6 No.8224   of   2011   praying   for   quashing   the   communication dated 09.12.2005 holding the appellants as non­eligible. Further, to issue mandamus, directing the respondents to include the names of the present appellants as persons being   eligible   to   receive   tenements/flats.   Prayer   to strike   down   condition   No.8   of   Annexure­A   of   the Government Resolution dated 09.07.1999 was also made. The High Court vide its judgment dated 19.06.2012 dismissed the writ petition. The High Court held that the proposal dated 27.04.2001 submitted by the Society was neither in continuation   of   the   earlier   allotment   letter   issued   by the   Authority   in   the   year   1997   nor   has   any   nexus   in respect thereof. The allotment dated 01.09.2003 was made on   the   basis   of   fresh   proposal.   It   was   one   of   the conditions of the Government Resolution dated 09.07.1999 that only such employees who were in the employment on the date of allotment of the land would be eligible to be the members of the Society. The appellants on that day being   not   in   employment   of   respondent   No.1,   they   have not   rightly   been   held   eligible.   With   the   aforesaid observation,   the   writ   petition   has   been   dismissed. Challenging the said judgment this appeal has been filed. 7 7. Shri Huzefa Ahmadi, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants submits that the appellants were fully eligible   for   allotment   of   land.   He   submits   that   the allotment of land has to be treated as allotment made on 07.06.1997 on the basis of which Letter of Intent dated 05.11.1998   was   issued.   He   submits   that   the   appellants were eligible on the date of Resolution dated 07.06.1997 as well as on 05.11.1998 they being in service on the above relevant dates they could not be held to be not eligible   relying   on   the   date   11.12.2003   on   which   date letter was issued on the basis of Resolution 01.09.2003. He   submits   that   subsequent   Resolution   dated   01.09.2003 was   in   continuation   and   in   modification   of   earlier Resolution dated 07.06.1997, hence, the eligibility has to be seen on the date when Resolution dated 07.06.1997 was passed. The appellants being eligible on the original date when the Resolution was passed, the view taken by respondent No.1 that they are not eligible for allotment was erroneous.It is further submitted that the appellants being members of the Society and eligible for allotment, they will not lose the eligibility merely on the ground that a subsequent Resolution dated 01.09.2003 was passed. 8 He   submits   that   the   view   of   the   High   Court   that   the allotment was made on the basis of a fresh proposal made by   the   Society,   is   incorrect.   The   allotment   is consequent to earlier proposal which culminated into the Resolution dated 07.06.1997. 8. Shri Shivaji M. Jadhav, learned counsel appearing for the   respondent   refuting   the   submissions   made   by   the appellants contends that a fresh allotment was made on 01.09.2003   on   the   basis   of   Government   Resolution   dated 09.07.1999 which is separate allotment having no relation to   the   earlier   Resolution   dated   07.06.1997.   He   submits that the appellants being not in service of the Authority on   the   date   when   Letter   of   Intent   was   issued   i.e. 11.12.2003, they have rightly been excluded from the list of eligible members. He submits that the High Court has taken correct view of the matter. 9. We   have   considered   the   submissions   of   the   learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 10. The High Court has dismissed the writ petition taking the view that allotment dated 01.09.2003 was passed on 9 the   fresh   proposal   submitted   by   the   Society   and   the Resolution dated 01.09.2003 being passed on separate and distinct   proposal,   eligibility   on   07.06.1997   is   not relevant.   Whether   the   above   reason   given   by   the   High Court for dismissing the writ petition is correct or not is the first issue which needs to be answered in this case. 11. In pursuance of Resolution dated 07.06.1997 Letter of Intent   dated   05.11.1998   was   issued   in   which   following terms were mentioned for allotment of land: “1. The   Association   of   employees   will form   the   proposed   Co­operative   Housing Society of the Employees within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of Authority's   letter   and   to   get   the   said Society registered within a period of 6 months.  2. Land will be allotted for a period of 80 years on lease hold basis. 3. The employees of the Authority of the Housing   Society   will   have   to   pay   an amount   at   the   rate   of   Rs.1400/­   per sq.mtr. as per the market rate fixed by the Town Planning Department, Thane for a period of 80 years as a premium. 4. The   provision   of   the   Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (Disposal   of   Land)   Regulations   will   be applicable to this allotment of land.” 10 12. The   letter   dated   05.11.1998   refers   to   Disposal   of Land   Regulations.   At   this   juncture,   we   may   notice   the above Regulations which were amended on 29.04.1997. The amended Regulation, 1997 has been brought on the record by the appellants themselves through rejoinder­affidavit. In the Amendment Regulation Clause (iA) has been added which is to the following effect: "(iA)   If   half   of   the   premium shall not be paid within one month or in case of Government within two months,   if   permitted   by   the Metropolitan   Commissioner,   the Agreement   concluded   with   the Authority shall stand determined and the   Earnest   Money   deposited   by Intending   Lessee   along   with   its tender   or   offer   shall   stand forfeited   to   the   Authority   without prejudice   to   the   rights   and   powers of Authority to recover compensation for loss or damage, if any suffered in consequence of such breach of the Intending Lessee to so pay half of the   premium   to   the   Authority. Likewise,   if   the   balance   premium shall   not   be   paid   within   twelve months   as   provided   hereto   before, the   Agreement   concluded   with   the Authority shall stand determined and the Earnest Money paid by him along with   its   tender   or   offer   together with   25   per   cent   of   the   premium shall be forfeited to the Authority without   prejudice   to   the   right   and powers   of   the   Authority   to   recover 11 compensation for loss or damage, if any, suffered in consequence of such default of the Intending Lessee.” 13. The   Disposal   of   Land   Regulations   as   amended   being applicable,   it   was   required   for   the   Society   to   make payment   of   premium   within   the   time   prescribed   by   the Authority.   Admittedly,   the   Society   did   not   make   the payment   of   premium   and   has   submitted   a   request   for permitting to make payment by instalments spread over 10 to 15 years.  It was further prayed that the land falling under   road   and   compulsory   open   spaces   will   be   made available   free   of   cost.   The   Society   requested   for relaxation of various conditions which were not granted by   the   Authority   at   any   point   of   time.   The   Resolution dated   07.06.1997   and   consequent   allotment   dated 05.11.1998 did not fructify into allotment of land and lapsed as per Disposal of Land Regulations as amended in 1997, Regulation (iA). In the meantime the Government of Maharashtra   has   issued   Resolution   dated   09.07.1999 providing various terms and conditions for allotment. In the   present   case,   we   are   concerned   with   one   of   the conditions   which   is   condition   No.8   of   Annexure­A. 12 Annexure­A is ”Eligibility for approval to the members of the Co­operative Housing Societies who intend to obtain Government land by paying concessional occupancy charges/ lease rent”. Condition No.8 which is a part of Annexure­A to the Resolution is to the following effect: "8. It   is   a   pre   requisite   that   the Government   Employee     will   be   in   the service on the date on which the indent letter will be issued to the Co­operative Housing   Society,   and   only   then   such employee will be treated as eligible for membership.” 14. The Society itself has made various applications to the Authority after Resolution dated 07.06.1997. One of the applications dated 09.12.1999 is Annexure P­5 where the   allotment   on   certain   modified   terms   and   conditions was   prayed   for,   which   was   never   granted.   Again   an application   dated   26.02.2001   was   given   by   the   Society where   it   has   referred   to   the   Resolution   made   on 07.06.1997   by   which   proposal   for   allotment   to   MMRDA Employees Co­operative Housing Society was passed. Prayer was   made   in   the   letter   dated   26.02.2001   to   put   up   a proposal for consideration of the Authority for allotment of land to Society. 13 15. Again letter dated 27.04.2001 was submitted by the Society to the Authority where it was requested to put up a   proposal   for   consideration   of   the   Authority   in   its forthcoming   meeting   in   accordance   with   Government   of Maharashtra Resolution dated 09.07.1999. It is useful to quote   the   prayer   made   in   paragraph   4   of   the   aforesaid letter: "4. You   are   now   requested   to   put   up   a proposal   for   the   consideration   of   the Authority in its forthcoming meeting for the allotment of earmarked MMRDA land at Chitalsar Manpada to the MMRDA Employees Co­operative   Housing   Society,   Chitalsar Manpuda,Thane   in   accordance   with   the Government of Maharashtra Resolution No. LCA­1095/P.K.37/95/J­1 (together with its th Annexures)   dated   9   July,   1999   as   was approved   by   the   Authority   for   the allotment of land to the MMRDA Class­IV Employees Co­operative Housing Society at Panchpakhadi.   We   are   in   a   readiness   to make the necessary payment for taking the possession of the land of 13,700 sq.mtr. area on the terms prescribed in the above referred   Government   of   Maharashtra Resolution. Thanking you, Yours faithfully, Sd/­  (A.V. Ghangurde) Chairman” 16. In response to letter dated 27.04.2001, the Authority 14 wrote a letter dated 03.05.2001 to the Society forwarding the   Resolution   dated   09.07.1999   and   requesting   the Society   to   go   through   the   terms   and   conditions   and communicate Society's willingness so that further action be   taken.   The   Society   vide   letter   dated   10.05.2001 communicated its willingness to abide by the Resolution dated   09.07.1999   and   thereafter   Resolution   dated 01.09.2003 was passed for allotment of land. In pursuance of Resolution dated 01.09.2003, letter dated 11.12.2003 was issued by the Authority to the Society. The Authority vide letter dated 11.12.2003 informed that lease premium may   be   charged   at   Rs.2500/­   per   sq.mtr.   instead   of Rs.1400/­ per sq. mtr. as was earlier approved. From the aforesaid   sequence   of   events,   it   is   clear   that   the allotment dated 01.09.2003 was a fresh allotment of land on   a   higher   premium   that   is   Rs.2500/­   per   sqr.   mtr. Earlier allotment dated 07.06.1997 had lapsed due to non­ fulfilment of the conditions as required by the Disposal of   Land   Regulations,   1977   as   noted   above.   Thus,   the allotment dated 01.09.2003 was on the basis of the fresh proposal   relying   on   the   Government   of   Maharashtra Resolution dated 09.07.1999. We, thus, are of the view 15 that   the   High   Court   is   right   in   its   conclusion   that allotment   dated   01.09.2003   was   on   the   basis   of   fresh proposal   of   the   Society   and   same   has   no   nexus   with respect to Resolution dated 07.06.1997. 17. Learned   counsel   for   the   appellants   relying   on Resolution dated 01.09.2003 submits that the Resolution dated   01.09.2003   clearly   mentions   that   it   modifies condition   No.3   contained   in   earlier   Resolution   dated 07.06.1997   which   clearly   means   that   Resolution   dated 01.09.2003   is   in   continuation   of   earlier   Resolution, hence, the eligibility of the members have to be seen on 07.06.1997   or   05.11.1998.   He   relies   on   the   following portion of  Resolution dated 01.09.2003: " RESOLVED   THAT,   in   exercise   of   power conferred under Sub­Section 2 of Section 3   of   the   Mumbai   Metropolitan   Region Development   Authority   Act,   1974   and making   modification   in   Condition   No.”c” contained   in   its   resolution   dated   727 th   passed   in   the   88      meeting   held   on 7.6.1997  and as proposed in paragraph 6 of   the   item   note,   the   authority   allots the land situated at Chitalhar, Manpada, Thane to the MMRDA employees cooperative housing   society   on   the   following   terms and conditions.” 18. It is true that Resolution dated 01.09.2003 modifies 16 condition   No.(c)   as   was   contained   in   Resolution 07.06.1997. Condition No.(c) was with regard to amount of premium per sq.mtr. which was Rs.1400/­. The Resolution dated   01.09.2003   modifies   the   said   amount   as   Rs.2500/­ per sq. mtr. The modification of above condition has been specifically   mentioned   since   earlier   the   Authority   has offered   the   plot   on   Rs.1400/­   per   sq.   mtr.   which   was subsequently made as Rs.2500/­ per sq.mtr. As noted above the Resolution dated 07.06.1997 itself was not honoured by the Society and it lapsed as per statutory Regulations noted above. 19. The   fresh   allotment   was   made   on   01.09.2003   in pursuance   of   which   Letter   of   Intent   was   issued   on 11.12.2003, thus, the eligibility has to be seen as per condition   of   Annexure­A   of   the   Government   Resolution dated   09.07.1999.   On   the   strength   of   Resolution   dated 01.09.2003 in so far as it modifies the rate of premium per sq.mtr., it cannot be said that the same allotment which   was   made   on   07.06.1997   has   been   continued   on 01.09.2003   and   the   eligibility   of   members   has   to   be pegged   on   the   date   of   Resolution   dated   07.06.1997   or 05.11.1998 i.e. issue of Letter of Intent.  We, thus, do 17 not   find   any   substance   in   the   above   submission   of   the learned counsel of the appellants.  20. The   submission   of   the   learned   counsel   for   the appellants   that   eligibility   with   regard   to   being   in service   has   to   be   seen   on   the   date   07.06.1997   or 05.11.1998, thus, cannot be accepted. The Society itself has   given   approval   vide   its   communication   dated 10.05.2001 to consider the allotment to the Society in its   forthcoming   meeting   on   17.05.2001   on   the   basis   of Government of Maharashtra Resolution dated 09.07.1999. It is thus clear that the Society itself has requested for a fresh consideration and fresh Resolution on the basis of the eligibility laid down by Resolution 09.07.1999. After after   issuance   of   allotment   letter   dated   11.12.2003   by which list of eligible members was asked for, in response to   which   Society   has   sent   its   communication   dated 10.06.2004 stating the following: "...The final list of members eligible as on 11.12.2003 by scrutiny of said list as per   terms   and   conditions   under   the Government   Resolution   through   the   Land Branch will be accepted to the Society. Also,   the   waiting   list   of   total   33 members   has   been   present   till   date through the Society and it will be sent to   the   Land   Branch   at   the   necessary 18 time.” 21. Thus,   the   Society   was   conscious   of   the   fact   that eligibility of members has to be seen as on 11.12.2003 that is the date on which Letter of Intent was issued in pursuance of allotment. The Society having accepted the aforesaid clause of eligibility   and accepted the offer of allotment as given by the Authority, we fail to see that how the eligibility as on 11.12.2003 be permitted to be questioned. 22. There is one more fact which needs to be noted. The Authority     has   proposed   allotment   of   13,700   sq.mtr   of land   which   is   apparent   from   its   Resolution   dated 01.09.2003   as   well   as   letter   dated   11.12.2003.   After scrutinising     the   list   of   eligibility,   ultimately,   the allotment   was   made   only   for   land   admeasuring   10,700 sq.mtr. by letter dated 09.12.2005. The Authority had not taken   into   consideration   the   area   for   non­eligible members   while   finalising   the   list   and   due   to   the aforesaid reasons the area allotted to the Society has been reduced from 13,700 sq.mtr. To 10,700 sq.mtr.. 23. Taking   into   consideration   the   aforesaid   facts   and 19 circumstances, we are of the view that no relief can be granted to the appellants. The High Court did not commit any error in dismissing the writ petition. We do not find any   infirmity   in   the   judgment   of   the   High   Court.   The appeal is dismissed. ...............................J. ( A.K. SIKRI ) ...............................J. ( ASHOK BHUSHAN ) NEW DELHI, APRIL 09, 2018.