The petitioner sought a writ declaring inaction under the Rajiv Awas Yojana and directing allotment of houses to poor women in Tirupati. The Court dismissed the PIL as relief could not be granted since the scheme was abolished by the Government.
The Prayer seeking declaration of illegality and direction to allot houses is dismissed.
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.
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT
Public Interest Litigation No. 321 of 2015
Date:18.1.2016
Between: Dr. Chinta Mohan, Former MP (LS), Tirupathi, Chittoor District.
Petitioner
And The Union of India, Represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation, New Delhi and others.
… Respondents
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT
Public Interest Litigation No. 321 of 2015
PC:(Per the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Dilip B. Bhosale)
Heard Mr. P.S.P. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. B. Narayan Reddy, learned Assistant Solicitor General for respondent No.1, Mr. K.K. Durga Prasad, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Municipal Administration for respondent No.2 and Mr. S.D. Goud, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.4.
The petitioner, who is a former Member of Parliament (L.S.) seeks the following relief:
“For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit , it is hereby prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring to order or direction more particularly in the nature of :-
a) Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ or order or direction declaring the action of Respondents in not constructing houses to the poor women living in slums of Tirupati Town under the Rajiv Awas Yojana project which was sanctioned by Respondent No.1 vide Office Memorandum dated 25.02.2014 as illegal, arbitrary, violation of principles of natural justice and violation of Articles 14,19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
b) Consequently direct the Respondent to allot the houses to the eligible poor women residing in slums of Tirupati Town under the rehabilitation scheme initiated by the Government of India without any financial burden on the beneficiaries and thereby ensure protection of fundamental right of having shelter guaranteed under Article 19(1)(e) read with Article 21 of Constitution of India to the needy public.”
It is not in dispute that the Rajiv Awas Yojana Scheme has been abolished by the Government of India and a new Scheme, viz., Prime Minister Awas Yojana has been introduced and is presently in force. When the new Scheme was brought into force, the proposal under the old Scheme, for which, the instant P.I.L., has been filed, was not saved.
In view thereof, the relief sought in the present P.I.L., cannot be granted and the P.I.L. is accordingly dismissed.
This, however, shall not preclude the petitioner from approaching the concerned authorities for implementation of the new scheme, if he so desires.
Consequently, pending miscellaneous applications shall also stand closed.
DILIP B. BHOSALE, ACJ
_________________
S.V. BHATT, J 18th January, 2016 Pnb
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the court can grant relief seeking construction of houses under an abolished scheme.
Whether the petitioner's claim under the Rajiv Awas Yojana can be maintained given the scheme's abolition.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Dr. Chinta Mohan
The Union of India
Dilip B. Bhosale
S.V. Bhatt
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
