S.N. Kapoor - (1.)The petitioner has challenged the order dated 20th July, 1994 cancelling public auction of certain plots bearing No. B-7/106-A, No. B-5/1A situated in Safdarjung Enclave and B-104, B-105, B-106 East of Kailash, New Delhi. He has also sought writ quashing the provisions of Section 41(3) of Delhi Development Authority Act (hereinafter called the 'DDA Act'), the provision allegedly being ultra vires of the Constitution. The petitioner further seeks that directions be issued restraining allotment and handing over of possession of the said plots, particularly, plot No. B-7/106A Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi to respondent No. 4 Smt. Saraswati Devi.
(2.)According to the petitioner DDA issued a public notice for auction of residential plots on 8th, 10th and 11th August, 1994 vide Annexure 'A'. The petitioner being interested in purchasing the residential plots in East of Kailash and in Safdarjung Enclave went to the office of DDA in the last week of July, 1994 in order to collect more details and came to know that there was an administrative order dated 20th July, 1994 of UOI not to auction the aforesaid plots in Safdarjung Enclave and two plots in East of Kailash till further orders. The petitioner made a representation vide letter dated 30th July, 1994 to the Lt. Governor about the illegal and capricious order submitting that the withdrawal of auction was against the public interest and policy adopted by the respondent in giving alternative plots to those whose land had been acquired, and urging the respondent to carry out the open auction. Vide letter dated 30.7.1994 (Annexure 'D'). The petitioner got three pay orders in all for Rs. 2 lacs dated 9.8.1994 prepared in favour of DDA in order to purchase a plot either in East ofKailash or in Safdarjung Enclave. He sent another representation dated 13.8.1994. The only reason for canceling the public auction was the direction of respondent U.O.I, in exercise of powers under Section 41(3) of DDA Act and direction to DDA not to allot aforesaid plots as alternative plots vide Annexure 'F' The allotment of alternative plot in South Zone was contrary to the policy of the DDA and to allot alternative plots in Dwarka and the Pappankalan Residential Scheme due to the paucity of space in South Zone. On account of the said policy for allotment of plots in South Zone several writs have been dismissed by the High Court as well as by the Supreme Court. The action of the DDA to cancel the auction was void and ultra vires and against the principles of natural justice. The allotment of exclusive Dwarka and Pappankala Residential Scheme was against the principles of public policy, arbitrary and discriminatory in nature. The direction was a misuse of Section 41(3) of the DDA Act and the allotment of alternative plot amounted to "individual largess" for the allotment of alternative plots is not a right but merely an additional facility. The writ has been filed as there was no efficacious alternative remedy.
(3.)The respondent No. 1-DDA contested the claim of the petitioner inter alia on the grounds that there was no infringement of any fundamental right or legal right of the petitioner. As per Clause 2(a) of the terms and conditions of the auction the DDA has reserved the right to withdraw any plot from the auction vide Annexure R-I. The withdrawal from public auction was duly announced. The petitioner was very well aware of the withdrawal. He has never made a bid nor paid any amount towards the same. The proposed allotment of plot in favour of respondent No. 4 Smt. Saraswati Devi was contemplated under the directions of Central Government dated 20.7.1994 and 4.8.1994 issued under Section 41(3) of DDA Act. The petitioner could not claim to have any particular plot put to auction and as such the petition is not maintainable. The petitioner could have participated in the auction of other plots held on 10 and 11.8.1994.