U.K. Acharya And Ors. vs State Of Gujarat And Ors. on 7 November, 1987
Prior to that, the State Government had taken the aforesaid tenements on lease from the Gujarat Housing Board because of bifurcation of the bilingual State of Bombay to accommodate the Government employees who were to work either in Sachiyalaya or in the offices of the Heads of Departments set up in Ahmedabad. With regard to 'H' & 'L' Colonies, the Government had passed a Resolution on 18th February, 1975 which is Annexure 'E' to Special Civil Application No. 1024 of 1979. As per the said resolution the Government has directed that all the existing 396 'Law Income Group Houses' constructed by the Gujarat Housing Board at Paldi, Ahmedabad, shall be converted from Rental Scheme to Hire-Purchase Scheme for allotment on hire purchase basis on conditions mentioned therein. It should be noted that the aforesaid resolution passed by the State Government was challenged before this Court in group of Special Civil Applications in the case of U.K. Acharya v. State . After considering the arguments at length the Division Bench of this Court has rejected the petitions. It is held in the said judgment that tenements of 'H' & 'L' Colonies were constructed by the Housing Board for making tenements available for housing needy persons by allotment on rental basis under low income group housing scheme. Therefore, the tenements which were constructed were to be made available for occupation to persons belonging to the low income group. The Court further observed that after formation of the State of Gujarat, to meet its housing requirements allotments of these houses were made to the transferred Government servants. In those cases also the Court negatived the contentions that the resolution was violative of Article 14, that it was contrary to Section 74 of the Gujarat Housing Board Act and that it was issued by the State of Gujarat under Section 82 of the Act without following the procedure laid down therein. In our view, in the present petitions it would suffice to say that tenements constructed in 'H' & 'L' Colonies were not owned by the Government and the Government had not decided to purchase them from the Gujarat Housing Board. They remained as those of the Gujarat Housing Board. They were constructed as per the Circular of the Central Government under a scheme known as 'Low Income Group Housing Scheme'. By the Resolution dated 18th February, 1975 the Government had converted the said scheme from rental scheme to hire-purchase scheme for allotment on hire-purchase basis on certain terms and conditions. Therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioners, who are residing in 'F', 'G', 'K' and Meghaninagar Colonies which are owned by the Government, are discriminated. Admittedly 'K' Colony was constructed by the Government. 'F', 'G' and Meghaninagar Housing Colonies were no doubt constructed by the Gujarat Housing Board but thereafter those tenements were purchased by the State Government. The tenements of 'H' and 'L' Colonies were taken on lease by the State Government but were not purchased. Subsequently, the State Government had passed a resolution converting them from rental to hire-purchase scheme for allotment on hire-purchase basis. Therefore, employees who were residing in 'H' and 'L' Colonies would stand on a different footing and they formed a different class. It cannot be said that the State Government ought to have decided to purchase 'H' and 'L' Colonies and as 'H' and 'L' Colonies are not purchased, it ought not to have purchased 'F', 'G' and Meghaninagar Housing Colonies constructed by the Gujarat Housing Board under some special scheme. Similarly, it would be difficult to accept the contention that because the State Government has permitted the Gujarat Housing Board to dispose of tenements of 'H' and 'L' Colonies, the State Government should be directed to dispose of tenements of other Colonies constructed by the Gujarat Housing Board in favour of the employees who are residing there as tenants. In our view, in this type of cases, there is no question of violation of Article 14 because it cannot be said that the petitioners are discriminated against because of fortuitous circumstances of sale of tenements of 'H' and 'L' Colonies in favour of some Government employees or employees of the S.T. Corporation or other persons. If by a fortuitous circumstance a chance or benefit of purchasing the tenements is given by a Government Resolution, it does not amount to a privilege having conferred upon some Government employees and, therefore, similar privilege should be granted to rest of the employees. Fortuitous circumstance in this case would be that some employees were allotted tenements in 'H' and 'L' Colonies during their service tenure and others were allotted in other Colonies and that by chance or for some reasons the Government had issued a resolution converting the rental scheme for 'H' and 'L'. Colonies to hire-purchase scheme.