Legal provisions involved: Articles 12 and 226 of the Constitution of India; Societies Registration Act, 1860
Judgement by: Supreme Court of India
Judge/Bench: Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice K. Vinod Chandran
Facts
The Appellant challenged the allotment of two super deluxe flats by HEWO to the third and fourth respondents. The third respondent, received preferential allotment despite applying after the deadline and the fourth respondent, working as the third respondent’s subordinate, was allotted a flat through draw of lots despite not satisfying the pay-band-level requirement.
Key Legal Provisions
Article 12 and Article 226 of the Constitution of India; Societies Registration Act, 1860
Issues raised
- Whether writ jurisdiction under Article 226 was maintainable against HEWO.
- Whether the allotments violated eligibility criteria and principles of fairness and transparency.
Arguments of the case
The Appellant argued alleged ineligibility of both respondents and that there was favouritism towards the governing body member and his subordinate which resulted in arbitrary exercise of power. The Respondent on the other hand argued that HEWO was a private entity beyond Article 12 and preferential allotment to governing body members was established practice.
Judgement
The Court held the allotments demonstrated nepotism, self-aggrandizement, and gross abuse of power. It imposed costs of ₹1 lakh on HEWO, ₹50,000 on the third respondent, and ₹25,000 on the fourth respondent.
Click here to VIEW full judgement.
