Petitioner sought transfer of leasehold rights to Old No.60, Nandanam Colony via writ. Court dismissed petition following Division Bench rulings that legal heirs cannot transfer public rental category allotments, upholding Board policy.
Petition dismissed; petitioner not entitled to transfer of leasehold rights.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08.07.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM
W.P.No.18764 of 2007
and
M.P.No.2 of 2007
G.Ravikumar ..Petitioner
Vs
Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Rep.by its Secretary and Administrative Officer, Nandanam, Chennai – 600 035. .. Respondent
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the respondent, relating to the order of the respondent in Rc.No.Va.Va.1/64058/07, dated 04.05.2007 and quash the same and direct the respondent herein to forthwith transfer the leasehold rights in respect of Old No.60, New No.4 of Nandanam Colony, Chennai 600 035 in the name of the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.Kandavadivel Doraisami
For Respondent : Mr.R.Bharath Kumar Standing Counsel
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed for issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus, to quash the order of the respondent dated 04.05.2007 in Rc.No.Va.Va.1/64058/07, in and by which, the petitioner was directed to vacate the house bearing Old No.60, New No.4 of Nandanam Colony, Chennai 600 035.
"The decision taken by the Housing Board not to transfer the allotment under the public rental category was with a specific purpose. It was a decision taken in larger public interest. There are many people in the queue, claiming such allotment. It is only when the houses are vacated, the Housing Board would be in a position to consider their request for allotment. In case existing allotments are transferred from the name of original allottee to the legal heirs and thereafter, to the next generation, the property would continue to be in the hands of chosen few and others would be denied of such accommodation. Therefore, an element of social objective was behind the decision taken by the Board not to permit transfers to the legal heirs. We do not find any illegality in the said policy decision warranting our interference. The application submitted by the appellant was rejected on valid reasons, in the light of the prevailing policy of the Board. The matter was considered once again by the Government and the plea was again rejected. The issue was re-examined by the learned Single Judge and arrived at a correct conclusion that the order does not warrant interference. We do not find any justifiable reason to take a different view in the matter."
ms
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
The Secretary and Administrative Officer,
Tamil Nadu Housing Board,
Nandanam,
Chennai – 600 035.
+1cc to Mr.R.Bharath Kumar, Advocate, SR.No.57123
+1cc to M/s.Muthumani Doraisami, Advocate, SR.No.56830
W.P.No.18764 of 2007
and
M.P.No.2 of 2007
Kak(18/09/2019)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the legal heirs of a tenant in a public rental allotment are entitled to transfer the leasehold rights.
Whether the High Court can interfere with the policy of the Housing Board regarding non-transfer of leasehold rights.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
K.Saraswathi Vs. State of TamilnaduFollowed¶19
W.A.No.1443 of 2008 in the case of K.Saraswathi Vs. State of Tamilnadu
Ambrish Ashok Pathak Vs. The Tamilnadu Housing BoardFollowed¶21
W.A.No.1722 of 2012 in the case of Ambrish Ashok Pathak Vs. The Tamilnadu Housing Board
S.L.P.No.7732 of 2015Referred¶21
1 provisions across 1 enactments
G.Ravikumar
Tamil Nadu Housing Board
K.Kalyanasundaram
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
