Orissa High Court
Smt. Gitarani Sharma vs Bhubaneswar Development .... Opposite ... on 10 May, 2021
Author: K.R. Mohapatra
Bench: K.R. Mohapatra
// 1 //
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.29490 of 2013
Smt. Gitarani Sharma .... Petitioner
Mr. Anupam Rath, Advocate
-versus-
Bhubaneswar Development .... Opposite Parties
Authority and others
Mr. Partha Mukherji, Advocate
CORAM:
THE CHIEF JUSTICE
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 10.05.2021
6. 1. This matter is taken up by video conferencing mode, in the Vacation Court.
2. The present writ petition was filed at a stage when the allotment of a shop No.G-4 under Ananta Vihar Shopping Complex Phase-II, Pokhariput, Bhubaneswar in favour of the Petitioner by provisional allotment order issued vide Letter No.27250 dated 8th July, 2013 by the Allotment Officer-1, Bhubaneswar Development Authority (BDA) was sought to be cancelled by the subsequent order dated 28th December, 2013 (Annexure-9), on the Petitioner's failure to deposit the balance bid amount towards the cost of shop within the stipulated period.
3. While issuing notice in the present writ petition on 21st January 2014, an interim order was passed staying the impugned order dated 28th December, 2013 under Annexure-9 cancelling the allotment.
Page 1 of 3// 2 //
4. Since then, the shop in G-4 Ananta Vihar Shopping Complex Phase-II, Pokhariput, Bhubaneswar has remained locked with no one occupying it. With the passage of time, the market value of the said shop has increased several fold compared to the price it fetched in the auction in 2013.
5. In the above circumstances, the Court on the previous date, i.e., 15th April, 2021 recorded the submission of learned counsel for the Petitioner that "the Petitioner is prepared to pay the current market price for the shop in question so that Opposite Party No.1 does not suffer any revenue loss." Mr.Partha Mukherjee, learned counsel appearing for the BDA had sought time to obtain instructions and accordingly the case was adjourned to today.
6. Today, Mr.Partha Mukherjee informs the Court that BDA is proposing to go in for a fresh auction in respect of the said shop G-4 Ananta Vihar Shopping Complex Phase-II, Pokhariput so that the successful bidder can pay the best possible price reflective of the current market price. He further states that it would open for the Petitioner to participate in such auction notwithstanding the earlier default in paying the bid amount.
7. Learned counsel for the Petitioner contends that the Petitioner has a legitimate expectation of allotment of the shop in her favour as long as she pays the highest market price.
Page 2 of 3// 3 //
8. The Court is unable to accept such submission. The legitimate expectation cannot mean that the Petitioner would have an indefeasible right of being allotted the shop without the BDA exploring the possibility of it fetching the best possible price. The BDA can possibly do so by going in for a fresh public auction. That alone will help determine the highest possible current market price that the shop in question can fetch.
9. Consequently, the interim order is vacated. It is clarified that as and when the BDA puts up the aforementioned shop for auction sale, it would be open to the Petitioner to participate in such action notwithstanding the fact the Petitioner has defaulted in paying the bid amount in the earlier auction.
10. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.
11. As the restrictions due to resurgence of COVID-19 situation are continuing, learned counsel for the parties may utilize a printout of the order available in the High Court's website, at par with certified copy, subject to attestation by the concerned Advocate, in the manner prescribed vide Court's Notice No. 4587 dated 25th March, 2020 as modified by Court's Notice No. 4798 dated 15th April, 2021.
(Dr. S. Muralidhar) Chief Justice ( K.R. Mohapatra) Judge B.K. Sahoo Page 3 of 3