Allotment of Flat to Sourav Ganguly was quashed as no one above Law

Humanity, Salt Lake & Anr. Vs State of West Bengal & Ors. (Calcutta High Court)

Conclusion: The allotment of a plot by the West Bengal Housing Infrastructure Development Corporation (HIDCO) to former cricketer and current BCCI President Sourav Ganguly for the purpose of establishing an educational institution was quashed as no one could claim to be exclusive, above the law and sought benefits from the State, especially when question arose for allotment of plots for commercial ventures.

Held: In the instant case,  it was imperative that in all future cases of allotment of land by the State Government to private parties for commercial exploitation, due process of law be followed by the State Government or the concerned Statutory or Public Authority. The State holds landed property in Trust and for the ultimate benefit of the citizens of the State in general and no one party could be permitted to reap special benefit from such property at the expense of the interest of the people at large. It was expected that the official respondents should bear this salutary principle in mind while entering into any commercial transaction concerning the property of the State. The country always stood by the sportspersons, especially who represent country in international events. It was also a fact that Sourav Ganguly had brought laurels for the country in cricket. But when it comes to law, our Constitutional Scheme is that all are equal and no one can claim to be exclusive, above the law and seek benefits from the State, especially when question arises for allotment of plots for commercial ventures. No one ever raised a finger when the Government showered awards and benefits to the sports persons, when they won any tournament, but this system was not to continue in perpetuity. If Sourav Ganguly was interested in development of sports especially cricket, in which he had many achievements to his credit, there might be already many State sports establishments, he could associate himself with them and motivate budding cricketers. Nothing was placed before the Court as regards any rules, regulations which permitted the WBHIDCO to accept surrender of the plot and refund the amount deposited but still the procedure was followed. There was need to have defined policy to guide on all issues so that there was no arbitrary exercise of power by applying pick and choose formula.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT

The present petition was filed in public interest to challenge allotment of plot bearing no. IID/2920/1, New Town by West Bengal Housing Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. (for short, ‘HIDCO’) totally in violation of rules, regulations and policies provided for allotment of plots. Allotment was made to respondent Nos. 9 and 10 vide letter dated September 27, 2013. The writ petition was filed in the year 2016 and is pending since then. When the matter was taken up for hearing, at the very outset, the learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 9 and 10/ the allottees and the Counsel appearing for HIDCO submitted that the respondent Nos. 9 and 10 having surrendered the plot and the amount deposited by them having been refunded, nothing survives for adjudication in the present petition. The prayers made therein have been rendered infructuous.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.