Housing Colony Welfare Association Vs. Govt. of A.P.& Ors.  INSC 1545
(8 September 2009)
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.6136 OF
2009 (Arising from S.L.P.(C) No.19152 of 2007) Allwyn Housing Colony Welfare
Association ..Appellant versus Government of Andhra Pradesh & Others
O R D E R
Appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the Division Bench of
the Andhra Pradesh High Court dated 14.09.2007 passed in Writ Appeal No.740 of
pertains to allotment/alienation of 3 acres and 18 guntas of land comprised in
Survey No.336, Balanagar, Mandal, Kukatpally, Ranga Reddy District to Hyderabad
Allwyn Employees Co-operative Housing committee, respondent No.5 herein, on
4.6.2005. Admittedly, respondent No.5 thereafter allotted and handed over plots
in the said property to various persons who claimed to be members of the
respondent No.5 society (although the appellant contended that they were not
herein filed a writ petition in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderbad
challenging the alienation/allotment of the aforesaid land to respondent No.5
herein which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge -2- on 21st August, 2007,
inter alia, on the ground that the persons to whom the respondent No.5 allotted
plots were not impleaded.
against the order of the learned Single Judge, the appellant filed a Writ
Appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court. The Division Bench of the
High Court, by the impugned order, declined to entertain the appellant's
challenge to the alienation made in favour of respondent No.5 on two grounds
the appellant did not offer any explanation for the delay of almost two years
between the date of alienation made in favour of respondent No.5 i.e. 4.6.2005
and filing of the writ petition i.e. April, 2007, and (2) the persons to whom
plots have been allotted by respondent No.5 and who are in possession of the
individual plots have not been impleaded as parties to the writ petition and
without hearing them, the allotment in question cannot be annulled.
opinion, non-impleadment of the beneficiaries of allotment was fatal to the
writ petition filed by the appellant."
the persons in whose favour plots were allotted/alienated by respondent No.5
have filed impleadment applications before us. The applications for impleadment
are allowed and they have also been heard.
opinion, natural justice required that the persons in whose favour respondent
No.5 allotted plots in the property and to whom possession had also been handed
over should have been impleaded in the writ petition and -3- they should have
been heard by the High Court. We have recently held in Fertilizers & Chemicals
Regional Director, ESI & Others reported in 2009 (11) SCALE 766 that no
order adverse to a party should be passed without hearing him. In the present
case, if the writ petition was allowed the order will adversely affect the allottees.
Hence, in the interest of justice, we are of the opinion that the matter should
be remanded to the Division Bench of the High Court for a fresh decision in
accordance with law after hearing the persons in whose favour plots in the land
have been allotted including the impleaded persons.
filing the writ petition is condoned.
we accept this appeal, set aside the impugned order of the Division Bench and
restore the Writ Appeal No.740 of 2007 on the roster of the High Court. The
impleaded parties are directed to file their counter affidavit within three
weeks from today before the Division Bench of the High Court. Rejoinder
thereto, if any, may be filed within the next two weeks.
we have allowed the applications for impleadment but if any affected party is
still there and he wants to implead himself in this matter, he is at liberty to
file an application for impleadment before the Division Bench of the High
Court. The matter shall be listed for final disposal before the Division Bench
immediately after the expiry of the aforesaid period.
it clear that we are not expressing any -4- opinion on the merits of the
dispute. All contentions are left open to the parties.
issuing notice on 21st April, 2008, this Court directed the parties to maintain
status quo. This order of status quo shall remain in force till the case is
decided by the High Court.
Appeal is allowed accordingly. No costs.
............................J. [MARKANDEY KATJU]