JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner by way of this writ petition on has sought to challenge the validity of the order dated 31.5.1994 (Ann.1) issue by the Director Local Self Bodies, Govt. of Raj., Jaipur respondent No.1 being violative of Articles 14, 19 & 21 of the Constitution of India on the grounds inter-alia that he was a bona fide allottee of Plot No.123 allotted by the Municipal Board, Nokha in the lottery system located at Karmachari Colony, Nokha, Distt. Bikaner on 23.5.1983. The respondent No.2 issued a registered letter dated 1.6.1983 to the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 5850/- within a period of 60 days and in case the said amount is not deposited, the allotment made in favour of the petitioner would be automatically cancelled. The said letter was received by the petitioner on 2.6.1983. Thereafter, on 3.4.1991, the respondent No.2 vide Agenda No.3 passed a Resolution recommending for regularisation of Plot No.123 in favour of the petitioner on the condition that he would deposit the interest as well as the penalties alongwith the principal amount of the plot in question. This fact is apparent from Annexure-3 dated 19.7.1993 thus:- HINDI MATTER 357598 2. Pursuant to the aforesaid communication, the petitioner through his power of Attorney Shri Ahmed Khan made an application/representation to the Board on 13.4.1993 wherein he expressed his readiness and willingness to deposit the aforesaid amount within the stipulated period. Acting on the basis of the aforesaid representation, the Board gave sanction vide letter No. MBM193-94/2100 dated 19.7.1993 (Ann.4) recommending regularisation in favour of the petitioner of Plot No. 123 as also to one Dhanraj Raigar having Plot No.125. 3. Thereafter, on 31.5.1994, the office of Addl. Director Local Bodies rejected the recommendation of the Board informing the Board to this effect that the Plot No.123 of the petitioner could not be regularised in favour of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner had not complied with the requisite amount within the stipulated period as had been termed vide letter of the Board dated 1.6.1983. Hence, this writ petition. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the relevant documents on record and examined the legal position on the subject. 5. Hence, this writ petition. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the relevant documents on record and examined the legal position on the subject. 5. In order to appreciate the contentions of the parties, I would like to quote the provisions of Rule 17 of the Rajasthan Municipalities (Disposal of Urban Land) Rules, 1974 which provides, as under:- "17. Allotment of Residential Plot at concessional rates procedure, categories, priority, plot size price, recoveries etc. (1) Every person entitled for allotment shall get himself registered with the Board concerned hereby making any application in the form prescribed by the Government obtainable from the Board concerned on payment of such registration fee as may be fixed by the Board from time to time. (2) The following categories of persons who are bona fide resident of Rajasthan shall be entitled for allotment of a residential plot for construction of a house at concessional rate if such a person does not own a plot of land or house (as provided in rule 10):- (a)Low income group people Whose income does not exceed Rs. (800) p.m. at the time of allotment. (b)Rajasthan State Govt. servants including employees of local authorities and statutory bodies of the State Whose income does not exceed to Rs. (2000) p.m. at the time of allotment. (c)Central Govt. employees who applied for allotment of resident plot before 9th May, 63. (d)Army Personnel including ex-servicemen upto the rank of J.C.Os and their families. 3. The residential plot shall be reserved and allotted to the categories of persons in the following proportion: a. 20% of the plots reserved for allotment shall be allotted to She persons entitled under categories (b) & (c) referred to sub-rule (2) on the basis of lottery according to procedure specified in Annexure B. (b) 10% of the plots reserved for allotment shall be allotted to defence personnel including ex-servicemen upto the rank of J.C.Os and their families provided that the priority for allotment of plot amongst them shall be fixed in following order : (i) to the widows and dependents of army personnel who have lost their lives while defending borders of the country. (ii) to disabled army personnel. (iii) other army personnel. (ii) to disabled army personnel. (iii) other army personnel. (c) 70% of the plots reserved for allotment by lottery shall be allotted to the persons entitled under category in clause (a) of sub-rule (2) on the basis of lottery according to procedure specified in Annexure B provided always that 15% of the reserved lots shall be reserved and allotted to the persons belonging to the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes and shall be allotted on the basis of lottery according to the procedure specified in Annexure-B. (4) Plots size and price.-The size of the plot and price to be charged from various categories of people entitled for allotment under these rules shall be in accordance with the Schedule attached to these rules. (5) Recovery of premium etc.-The amount of premium of land and other expenses, if any shall be recovered from the allottee within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of intimation for depositing the amount: Provided that the allottee may deposit the said amount within the next 30 days but an interest @ 15% per annum shall be charged with effect from the date of allotment failing after which the allotment of land shall automatically stand cancelled: Provided further that the Board may regularise such allotment of land withdrawing the automatic cancellation within a period of ten months from the date of said automatic cancellation on the following conditions:- (i) If the allottee is prepared to pay the full amount of premium and expenses, if any plus interest @ 15% per annum upto the date of regularisation of allotment of land and in addition also an amount of penalty at the following rates:- Premium of land Penalty after the date of automatic cancellation (a) not exceeding Rs. 5000/- Rs. 250/- p.m. (b) exceeding Rs. 5000/- and upto Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 500/- p.m. Rs. 1000/- p.m. (c) exceeding Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 1000/- p.m. (d) the amount of penalty mentioned in items (a), (b) and (c) above shall not exceed the principal amount. 5000/- Rs. 250/- p.m. (b) exceeding Rs. 5000/- and upto Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 500/- p.m. Rs. 1000/- p.m. (c) exceeding Rs. 10,000/- Rs. 1000/- p.m. (d) the amount of penalty mentioned in items (a), (b) and (c) above shall not exceed the principal amount. (ii) after expiry of the period of ten months from the date of the said automatic cancellation the Board shall have no power to regularise such allotment of land in any case; (iii) However, if the Board considers it so necessary in its interest, may refer the case to the State Government for such regularisation and the State Government after giving due regard to the recommendations made by the Board may permit such regularisation on payment by the allottee, the amount of premium and expenses if any, plus interest and penalty as provided in Clause (i) above upto the month in which the case referred to the State Government by the Board.)" 6. During the course of hearing, Mr. Rohitashwa Kajala, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner laid much emphasis upon sub-rule (5) of the rules and contended that the Board could have regularised such allotment of land withdrawing the automatic cancellation within 10 months from the date of such cancellation more particularly when his case is at par with the case of one Dhanraj who was allotted Plot No. 125 adjacent to his plot whose possession has not been cancelled by the Board. 7. The Board in para 6 of its reply contended that in the instant case, the petitioner himself left his right by not accepting the plot due to crossing of 33 KV line over the plot in question and did not deposit the required premium in time. Moreover, the regularisation of plot in favour of Dhanraj was made in 1991 on the basis of resolution passed in 1990 but in the present case, the petitioner himself applied for regularisation of the plot on 30.4.1993 through his Power of Attorney after a lapse of near about 10 years when the price of plot has reached to about Rs. 1 lac. 8. Apart from above, counsel for the respondent contended that the petitioner has no legal right for regularisation of plot No. 123 in his favour as he has approached this Court after expiry of more than 10 years. 1 lac. 8. Apart from above, counsel for the respondent contended that the petitioner has no legal right for regularisation of plot No. 123 in his favour as he has approached this Court after expiry of more than 10 years. Hence, the said respondent is not empowered to regularise the plot in question in favour of the petitioner in view of the provisions contained in sub-rule (ii) of sub-rule (5) of the Rules which provides that : after expiry of the period of ten months from the date of the said automatic cancellation the Board shall have no power to regularise such allotment of land in any case. 9. Counsel for the Board further contended that in case, the plot (the old price of which is approx. 20,000/-) in question is allotted to the petitioner the price of which has reached to Rs. 1 lac, it would be a great loss to the Board. 10. In view of the above stated position, I am prima-facie of the view that the petitioner has no lis in his favour. So far as the contention of the petitioner that similar treatment has been given to one Dhanraj, but from the perusal of the reply, it is borne out that Dhanraj had already complied with the requisite formalities while the petitioner had not. 11. Be that as it may, the natural justice demands that in case the petitioner is ready and willing to pay atleast 50% of the prevailing cost of the plot in question, I hope and expect that his candidature for allotment of the plot in question should have been sympathetically considered by the respondents in its letter and spirit. 12. Keeping in view this aspect of the matter, I accordingly direct the respondents to suitably consider the case of the petitioner for allotment of the plot in question at 50% cost of the appreciated cost at par with the case of one Dhanraj in case, if the petitioner makes a representation to them. On representation being made, the respondents shall issue a fresh demand letter within four weeks from presentation of such representation as per the prevalent price of the land in question. 13. On representation being made, the respondents shall issue a fresh demand letter within four weeks from presentation of such representation as per the prevalent price of the land in question. 13. The petitioner is also directed to make representation within four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and pay atleast 50% of the demanded cost within eight weeks from the date of receipt of demand letter from the respondents. 14. It is left open to the respondents to make allotment of the plot to the petitioner in either locality as may be feasible to the Board keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case.With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.Petition Disposed of. *******