'Land A Precious Resource, State Must Be Transparent In Distribution': Supreme Court Quashes Maharashtra Govt's Land Allotment To Pvt Doctors

Citing arbitrariness in the allotment process, the Supreme Court (Dec.12) set aside the allotment of land made by the Maharashtra Government in favor of the Medinova Regal Co-operative Housing Society (“MRCHS”) to provide housing facilities to the doctors working at Tata Memorial Hospital.

While doing so, the Court underscored the need to maintain transparency in the distribution of 'land' by the State where it is recognized as a precious community material source.

“Land is a precious material resource of the community and therefore the least which is required from the State is transparency in its distribution. In our opinion, therefore there has been a complete arbitrariness in the allotment in favour of MRCHS. As far as the present appellant is concerned, its case for allotment of a plot is a matter which is yet to be decided by the authorities, but the allotment of the plot in favour of MRCHS is not proper, as it is violative of the procedure as well as eligibility criteria.”, the court observed.

The bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah heard the appeal filed by a Proposed Vaibhav Cooperative Housing Society Limited challenging the Bombay High Court's decision that upheld the land allotment made by the State Government in MRCHS's favor for construction of the housing facility for the Tata Memorial Hospital Doctors so that they can live within the close proximity of their workplace. The appellant sought the Supreme Court's interference contending that the land allotment done in MRCHS's favor was improper without following established procedures and eligibility criteria. 

Briefly put, in 2000, MRCHS applied for land allotment in Bandra, Maharashtra, intended for members, primarily doctors from Tata Memorial Centre, who lacked housing near their workplace. In 2003, the Maharashtra government issued a Letter of Intent (LoI) for a plot, but it was different from the one originally requested. Over time, MRCHS changed its membership multiple times, replacing ineligible members, raising eligibility concerns. The government found several members, both original and new, ineligible due to income limits.

The appellant argued that MRCHS received favorable treatment despite failing to meet eligibility criteria and that the allotment lacked transparency.

After the Bombay High Court dismissed the appellant's writ petition, the appellant appealed to the Supreme Court.

Setting aside the High Court's decision, the judgment authored by Dhulia J. noted that the entire land allotment exercise was conducted unfairly.

Reference was made to the Land Revenue (Disposal of Government Land) Rules, Maharashtra, 1971 (“Rules”) read with Government Regulations dated 09.07.1999 (“GR 1999”) which lays down a detailed procedure for allotment of land to any Proposed Co-­Operative Housing Society in Maharashtra. As per Clause 11 of the Rules, a reason is to be given by the State Government in writing as to why such allotment is made in favor of a particular society. Noting that no such procedure was followed in the instant case, the Court said that the entire land allotment exercise was conducted arbitrarily.

"Clause 11 provides the mechanism by which the public can get to know that government land is available for allotment and can apply for the same. Also, if land is allotted under the discretionary powers of the government, then it is necessary to give reasons in writing as to why such allotment is made in favour of a particular society. Since there has to be transparency in matters of allotment of land by the government, adherence to the above rules and regulations becomes important in the cases of allotment, but unfortunately, all this is completely missing in the present case where allotment was made in favour of MRCHS in total violation of the prescribed procedure.", the court said.

For the reasons made herein above, the Court allowed the appeal, and set aside the land allotment in MRCHS's favor.

Appearance:

For Appellant(s) Mr. Vinay Navare, Sr. Adv. Mr. Prashant Shrikant Kenjale, AOR Mr. Harish Nirbhavane, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. Sanjay Kharde, Sr. Adv. Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv. Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv. Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv. Ms. Preet S. Phanse, Adv. Mr. Adarsh Dubey, Adv. Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sandeep Sudhakar Deshmukh, AOR Mr. Nishant Sharma, Adv. Mr. Patil Avi Vilas, Adv.

Case Title: PROPOSED VAIBHAV COOPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 984

Click here to read/download the judgment

Related judgment - 'Preferential Allotment To A Few Elites Promotes Inequality': Supreme Court Quashes Land Allotment For MPs, MLAs, Judges Etc In Hyderabad