TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 1425X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation is therefore to be founded on substantial differences which distinguish persons grouped together from those left out of the groups and such differential attributes must bear in just and rational relation to the object sought to be achieved. In a given case Article 14 of the Constitution may permit a valid classification. However, a classification to be followed must necessarily satisfy two tests. Firstly, the distinguishing rationale has to be based on a just objective and secondly, the choice of differentiating one set of persons from another must have a reasonable nexus to the objects sought to be achieved. In the present case allotment of 200 Sq.Yards free of cost to 134 employees was to avoid undue hardship to the ex-employees and as a welfare measure. As observed, those 318 ex-employees who are denied the benefit of allotment of 200 Sq.Yards of plots free of cost are similarly placed persons with that of 134 employees who are allotted 200 Sq.Yards plots free of cost. There is no rationale justification in providing differential treatment to one class of ex-employees similarly placed with another class of ex-employees who are allotted the plots. The Respondents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that a large number of employees voluntarily retired on one day i.e. 31.08.2002. That, all the employees including the members of the Workers Association were asked vide Notification dated 17.07.1986 to vacate the quarters which were in the respective occupations of the respective members/employees. In the said notice it was stated that the quarters in which the employees were staying were in dilapidated condition and became unfit for human habitation. Approximately 318 employees including the members of the Workers Association were forcefully evicted from the quarters. Thereafter, the management of the Mill demolished all the quarters vacated/evicted by 318 employees. However, some of the employees who were about 134 in number, continued to stay in their respective quarters despite service of the notice dated 17.07.1986 asking them to vacate the quarters. In the meantime, the Mill submitted an application dated 30.05.2002 for closure of the Mill. On the said application, proceedings were initiated by the Ministry of Labour in which the management and representatives of the Union participated. During the hearing, a request was also made on behalf of the representatives of the Unio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tition before the High Court being Writ Petition No. 26642 of 2007. That, by a detailed and reasoned judgment and order the learned Single Judge allowed the said writ petition and directed the Respondents to allot house sites of 200 Sq. Yards each to all the eligible 318 members of the Workers Association by observing that they are at par with other 134 ex-employees of the Mill, who were already allotted house sits of an extent of 200 Sq. Yards each as per the G.O. No. 463 dated 26.07.2007. 2.3 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge, both, the NTC as well as the KUDA filed Writ Appeals before the Division Bench and by the impugned common judgment and order the Division Bench of the High Court has allowed the said Writ Appeals and has quashed and set aside the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge. Hence, the present Appeals. 3. Ms. Nitya Ramakrishnan, learned Senior Advocate has appeared on behalf of the Appellant, Mr. V. Giri, learned Senior Advocate has appeared on behalf of the KUDA and Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, learned ASG has appeared on behalf of the NTC and the Union of India. 4. Ms. Ramakrishn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rkmen would not have vacated the quarters, in that case, they would have also been allotted 200 Sq. Yards plots at par with 134 workmen who were allotted 200 Sq. Yards plots free of cost. 4.4 It is submitted that as rightly observed by the learned Single Judge, there was no difference at all between 318 remaining workmen and 134 workmen who were allotted 200 Sq. Yards plots. 4.5 It is submitted that as such not allotting 200 Sq. Yards plots to remaining 318 workmen would tantamount to punishing them for complying with the eviction notice while rewarding 134 workmen for defying it which is manifestly unjust. 4.6 It is further submitted that as such the purpose of allotment of the plots was for rehabilitation and welfare of the workmen. It is submitted that in fact right from very beginning even when the proceedings were before the Ministry of Labour, while considering the request of the Mill for closure, there was already a demand on behalf of the workers to allot them quarters at concessional rates. It is submitted that thereafter even the Deputy Chairman of the KUDA made a request to allot 200 Sq. Yards plots to 134 workmen on the ground of rehabilitation and welfare of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the KUDA. 5.1 It is vehemently submitted on behalf of the KUDA that as such as rightly observed by the Division Bench, a writ of mandamus could not have been issued directly to allot land to the Workers Association/members of the Workers Association in view of the fact that the land in question is a private land and not a government land. 5.2 It is vehemently submitted by Mr. Giri, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the KUDA that KUDA is an independent organization and KUDA purchased the land belonging to the NTC/Mill on payment of full sale consideration and as it was found that 134 employees continued to occupy the quarters and therefore, it was not possible for the KUDA to develop the land allotted/purchased and therefore, to avoid any litigation it was decided to allot 200 Sq. Yards of plot free of cost out of 135.33 Acres of land allotted to the KUDA. It is submitted that so far as the remaining other 318 ex-employees are concerned, they had already vacated the quarters and therefore, they were not in possession of the quarters and therefore, their cases cannot be compared with those who continued to be in occupation and possession of the quarters. It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntly submitted that as such the writ petition preferred by the Appellant - Workers Association before the High Court itself was not maintainable. It is submitted that in the writ petition it was prayed for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to allot the land to an extent of 200 Sq. Yards to each member of the Workers Association. It is submitted that it is trite law that a writ of mandamus is maintainable only if the person aggrieved has a legal right and legal duty by the party against whom the mandamus is sought. Reliance is placed on decisions of this Court in the cases of Director of Settlements, A.P. and Ors. v. M.R. Apparao and Anr., (2002) 4 SCC 638; Lalaram and Ors. v. Jaipur Development Authority and Anr. (2016) 11 SCC 31 and Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Ors. v. Rafiqunnisa M. Khalifa (Deceased) Through his Legal Heir Mohd. Muqueen Qureshi and Anr., (2019) 5 SCC 119. 5.7 It is further submitted that the Appellant Association has claimed the right on the basis of G.O. No. 463 dated 27.06.2007. It is submitted that under the said Government Order the State of Andhra Pradesh granted approval to KUDA to allot 200 Sq. Yards of land to 134 e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on that affidavits cannot be looked into and differentia should be forthcoming from the Notification only. It is submitted that the G.O. No. 463 shows that there was urgency for development. It is submitted that KUDA would have had to undertake the litigation process which was contrary to its commercial interest and would defeat the purpose for which the land was bought i.e. development for the city of Warangal and surrounding areas. It is submitted that therefore the allotment in favour of 134 persons - erstwhile employees was moreover in the nature of settlement, so that the work of development could be undertaken at a quick pace. 5.9 It is further submitted that KUDA is an authority created under the Telangana Urban Areas (Development) Act, 1975 to carry out the development activities inter alia in Warangal District in the State of Telangana. It is submitted that as such the members of the Workers Association have no relation with the 2nd Respondent, let alone that of employer - employee. It is submitted that therefore as there exists no obligation on the 2nd Respondent (KUDA) to allot plots of 200 Sq. Yards each to the employees of the 4th Respondent herein. It is submitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed. It is submitted that accordingly land admeasuring Acres 65.69 Cents was sold to Andhra Pradesh Housing Board and Acres 135.33 Cents to KUDA. It is submitted that thereafter the Committee was dissolved vide BIFR Order dated 20.08.2014. It is submitted that as per Section 3 of the Sick Textile Undertakings (Nationalization) Act, 1974, the right, title and interest of Azam Jahi Mills shall stand transferred to and shall vest absolutely in the Central Government. It is submitted that the NTC and the Mills thereafter are only the custodian of the Azam Jahi Mills and its properties on behalf of the Central Government who is the absolute owner. 6.1 It is further submitted by Ms. Bhati that out of the total Acres 135.33 Cents sold to KUDA, only Acres 117.20 Cents was available for registration as Acres 14.88 Cents was under encroachment. It is submitted that as such as on date, around 5 Acres of land only is in the possession of the Mill as a custodian on behalf of the Central Government who is the absolute owner of the said properties. It is submitted that as such as per the OM No. 8(18)/2020-E-II(A) dated 28.03.2011 of the Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance (Government ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eged. It is submitted that in any case the Central Government/NTC/Mills had nothing to do with the decision taken by the KUDA. It is submitted that therefore the Division Bench of the High Court has rightly allowed the appeal preferred by the NTC and has rightly quashed and set aside the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge and has rightly consequentially dismissed the writ petition. 7. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties at length. 7.1 The Appellant Workers Association for and on behalf of 318 ex-employees of the Respondent No. 4 - Mills approached the High Court by way of a writ petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and prayed to allot them 200 Sq. Yards of plots free of cost at par with other 134 employees of the erstwhile Respondent No. 4 Mills. It was the specific case on behalf of 318 ex-employees of the erstwhile Respondent No. 4 that they are similarly situated with 134 ex-employees of erstwhile Respondent No. 4 inasmuch as both the classes (one class consisting of 318 employees and another class consisting of 134 employees) are similarly situated; the employees belonging to both the classes were the employe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... land? (3) Does Article 14 of the Constitution have any application in the present case? (4) Whether to determine the intelligible differentia the affidavit filed on behalf of the concerned Respondents can be looked into and/or relied upon? (5) Whether any relief can be claimed against KUDA and/or against the NTC/Respondent No. 4 Mills? 9. We have heard learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties at length on the aforesaid issues. At the outset it is required to be noted that 318 ex-employees of the erstwhile Respondent No. 4 Mills prayed for equality and claimed the reliefs at par with other similarly situated 134 ex-employees of the erstwhile Respondent No. 4 Mills who were allotted 200 Sq. Yards of plots free of cost. 9.1. It is to be noted and it cannot be disputed that even at one point of time as admitted by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of KUDA that 318 ex-employees who were not allotted 200 Sq. Yards of plots are as such similarly situated to those 134 ex-employees of the erstwhile Respondent No. 4 Mills who were allotted 200 Sq. Yards of plot free of cost pursuant to the approval vide G.O. No. 463 dated 27.06.2007. All of them as such we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... communication/letter dated 28.12.2006 nor in the G.O. No. 463 dated 27.06.2007 that to avoid any litigation and/or litigation cost as now stated in the affidavit in reply it was proposed to allot 200 Sq. Yards of plots to 134 ex-employees. However, thereafter when a request was made on behalf of the remaining 318 ex-employees, who as such were similarly situated to those 134 ex-employees, also to allot to them 200 Sq. Yards of house plots, their request came to be turned down. From the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the observations made hereinabove, it is found that 318 ex-employees were not allotted the 200 Sq. Yards of plots and 134 ex-employees who were allotted 200 Sq. Yards of plots free of cost who as such were similarly situated and as such there is no difference between them at all. On the contrary, 318 ex-employees can be said to be law abiding ex-employees who vacated the quarters after 1986 but before 2002 pursuant to the notice dated 17.07.1986. It is not in dispute that 134 ex-employees who were allotted 200 Sq. Yards of plots free of cost were in unauthorized occupation of the quarters and they did not vacate the quarters despite the notice dated 17.07.1986 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fferential attributes must bear in just and rational relation to the object sought to be achieved. In a given case Article 14 of the Constitution may permit a valid classification. However, a classification to be followed must necessarily satisfy two tests. Firstly, the distinguishing rationale has to be based on a just objective and secondly, the choice of differentiating one set of persons from another must have a reasonable nexus to the objects sought to be achieved. In the present case allotment of 200 Sq.Yards free of cost to 134 employees was to avoid undue hardship to the ex-employees and as a welfare measure. As observed hereinabove those 318 ex-employees who are denied the benefit of allotment of 200 Sq.Yards of plots free of cost are similarly placed persons with that of 134 employees who are allotted 200 Sq.Yards plots free of cost. There is no rationale justification in providing differential treatment to one class of ex-employees similarly placed with another class of ex-employees who are allotted the plots. 9.4. Now, so far as the case on behalf of KUDA now before this Court in the form of counter affidavit that to avoid any litigation and litigation cost and to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... District Legal Services Authority, Warangal and it is posted to 03.03.2008 for hearing. Hence, the writ petition is not maintainable. The members of the Petitioner association had voluntarily retired from the services of the mill under modified VRS 2002. Their accounts were settled by the NTC long time back. Hence, the request for allotment of house sites to the members of the Petitioner association on par with (134) other employees does not arise for consideration. In fact, the 3rd Respondent KUDA had taken over possession of (134) quarters covered in an area of Ac. 117.00 guntas of land. The allotment of plots to the (134) workers, who were staying in the quarters, was considered as a measure of rehabilitation and welfare by the Government as well as KUDA. There is no illegality or irregularity in the matter. KUDA had submitted proposals to the Government for allotment of plots to (134) workers only, as they were still continuing to stay in the quarters at the time of taking over physical possession of the land by KUDA from NTC. The Government had issued orders for allotment of plots to those (134) employees who were by then staying in the quarters. This Respondent cannot allot p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deal. The members of the Petitioner association cannot re-enter the picture and seek allotment of house sites. As per the Government Order, the Project has to be finalized to raise funds for City infrastructure development and therefore, this Respondent was obliged to raise funds through the sale proceeds by selling plots. Even if any of the land is available, it is for the development of KUDA and city and not reserved for allotment to the Petitioners on free of cost on par with (134) members. There is no scope for sparing the land of this Respondent to the members of the Petitioner association. Hence, the writ petition may be dismissed. 9.5. From the above and even from the grounds of appeal before the Division Bench, Respondents tried to justify their action by submitting that case of 318 ex-employees is not comparable with those of 134 ex-employees as 318 ex-employees vacated the quarters and they were not in possession and that only 134 ex-employees remained in possession of the quarters. For the first time before this Court, in the counter affidavit, it is now the case on behalf of the Respondent KUDA and others that to avoid any litigation and/or litigation cost, it was pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on behalf of the Respondents that those 134 persons were allotted the plots by mistake and/or there was any wrong committed in allotting 200 Sq. Yards of plot to the said 134 persons. Therefore, there is no question of applicability of any negative equality. Therefore, the aforesaid decision shall not be applicable to the facts of the case on hand. 9.7. Now, so far as the submission on behalf of the Respondents that they do not have any sufficient land at present to allot 200 Sq. Yards of plots to remaining 318 ex-employees and that all those 318 ex-employees vacated the quarters voluntarily and they settled in their houses is concerned, at the outset it is required to be noted that merely because for whatever reason and even as a law abiding person they vacated the quarters, they cannot be put to disadvantageous situation being a law abiding persons. Even it cannot be presumed that all those 318 ex-employees who vacated the quarters and stayed elsewhere were settled. It cannot be presumed like that without any factual data. There may be many ex-employees who were compelled to vacate the quarters and who might not have settled or might be staying in a one room house. In any case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
