Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 2042 (ALL)

Fanina R. Pandey v. District Magistrate

2003-09-05

RAKESH TIWARI

body2003
ORDER : RAKESH TIWARI, J. 1. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. The Petitioner was working as Nurse and posted at Women Hospital, Nakhas Kohna, Allahabad. She was allotted Flat No. 502/2 by the Additional District Magistrate (City), Allahabad vide allotment letter dated 30.7.1996. 3. It is alleged that the Additional District Magistrate (City), Allahabad, allotted the House of the Petitioner to one Smt. Sharda Singh, vide allotment letter dated 24.5.1999, who is also a Nurse. The Petitioner made a representation before the Respondent No. 2 and the order of allotment was stayed. An enquiry was set up by order dated 1.6.1999, by Respondent No. 2. After the enquiry by the Junior Engineer of the P.W.D. a report, dated 6.7.1999, was submitted by him. Pursuant to the report the order of allotment in favour of the Smt. Sharda Singh, dated 24.5.1999, was cancelled by order dated 10th August, 1999. 4. It is contended that Smt. Sharda Singh again approached Respondent No. 2 and the house was again allotted in her favour by order dated 28.12.1999. The Petitioner again moved a representation before Respondent No. 2 alleging about the illegality in allotment of the House in favour of Smt. Sharda Singh. In spite of the aforesaid facts Respondent No. 3, the City Magistrate, Allahabad, passed the order dated 2nd March, 2000, by which Petitioner was directed to vacate the allotted premises within 7 days. 5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the Petitioner has filed this writ petition on the ground that she is entitled to the Government accommodation and is continuously residing in the disputed Flat No. 502/2, which has been allotted to Smt. Sharda Singh. 6. Counter-affidavit has been filed by the City Magistrate, Allahabad, on this behalf as well as Respondent No. 3. In paragraph 6 of the affidavit, it has been stated that on her transfer to Women Hospital, Nakhas Kohna, Allahabad, the Petitioner had given no objection certificate dated 30.11.1999, Annexure-C.A. 1 for allotment of the House No. 502/2 in favour of one Sri Robin Vijay Tek. 7. It is submitted that prior to the aforesaid no objection certificate dated 30.11.1999, given by the Petitioner Smt. Sharda Singh had moved an application stating that the Petitioner wants to hand over the Flat/Residential Accommodation No. 502/2 to Robin Vijay Tek. 7. It is submitted that prior to the aforesaid no objection certificate dated 30.11.1999, given by the Petitioner Smt. Sharda Singh had moved an application stating that the Petitioner wants to hand over the Flat/Residential Accommodation No. 502/2 to Robin Vijay Tek. After transfer of applicant from S. R. N. Hospital, Allahabad, to the Women Hospital, Nakhas Kohna the house was allotted in favour of Smt. Sharda Singh but as the applicant had not been allotted any House on her transfer to Women Hospital, Nakhas Kohna the order dated 24.5.1999, was cancelled. It is also submitted that when the applicant gave no objection certificate for allotment of the house in favour of Robin Vijay Tek, her intention to vacate the house in near future became clear. The matter was again taken up on the application of Smt. Sharda Singh and it was found that she had better claim than Sri Robin Vijay Tek and as such the House was again allotted in her favour. 8. It is further submitted by the counsel for the Respondents that the applicant had mala fide intention and she did not want to allot the house in favour of Sharda Singh as she had given no objection certificate in favour of Robin Vijay Tek which has rightly been allotted by the authorities in favour of Smt. Sharda Singh in accordance with Rules. 9. It is admitted fact that the applicant has given no objection certificate for allotment of the house, she cannot object to the house being allotted to any person according to the Rules. 10. The Respondents have given cogent reasons for allotment of the house to Smt. Sharda Singh and there is no illegality, in allotment of the house in favour of Smt. Sharda Singh. It appears that the Petitioner wants to stall the proceedings of the house to Smt. Sharda Singh and the writ petition has been filed only for this motive. The Petitioner has abused the process of court. 11. For the reasons stated above, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order. This is not a fit case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. Cost of Rs. 1,000 for abuse of process of court is imposed on the Petitioner.