JOYDEEP MUKHARJEE versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.

Citation: [2011] 2 S.C.R. 493 · Decided: 03-02-2011 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.H. KAPADIA, K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, SWATANTER KUMAR · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

_[2011] 2 $.C.R. 493 
JOYDEEP MUKHARJEE 
v 
\. 
STATE OF WEST. BENGAL & ORS. 
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 43 of 2006) 
FEBRUARY 03, 2011 
[S.H. KAPADIA, CJI., K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND 
SWATANTER KUMAR, JJ.] 
A 
B. 
Constitution of India, 1950-Articles 226 and 32- Public 
Interest Litigation (PIL) - Allotment of Governmeqt lands in C 
Salt Lake City, Kolkata - PIL alleging that the allotment made 
by the Chief Minister from his discretionary quota was 
aibitrary, illegal and in violation of the Master Plan --Held: 
Different writ petitions and/or appeal were filed before tfle High 
Court as well as Supreme Court with regard to allotment of D 
large number of plots in Salt Lake City - Though doubts were 
raised by the High Court as well as Supreme Court regarding 
the said allotments, the allotments in favour of the private 
parties were not set aside, for one reason or the other -
-- However, as all these judgments have attained finality, they E 
cannot be permitted to be agitated over and over again 
including in the instant writ petition - Principles of finality as · 
well as fairness demand that there should be an end to the 
litigation -
Recently, guidelines have been issued for 
allotment of both individual and co-operative residential plots 
F 
in Salt Lake - At present, only 14 plots are left for allotment 
under the discretionary quota and the State Government has 
taken a conscious decision not to make further allotments -
Questions ,raised have become merely academic as rights of 
the parties have been finally settled and have attained finality, 
G 
and the parties have acted thereupon to their respective 
prejudices - Thus, PIL dismissed - Urban Development -
Judgment/Order ""'." Maxims - Interest rei publicae ut sit finis 
litium. 
493 
H 
A 
B 
c 
494 
SL!PREME COURT REPORTS 
[2011] 2 S.C.R. 
Dipak K. Ghosh v State of West Bengal (2006) 3 SCC 
765; A Registered Society v. Union of India (1996) 6 SCC 
530; Tarak Singh v. Jyoti Basu (2005) 1 SCC 201 - referred 
to. 
(2006) 3 sec 765 
(1996) 6 sec 530 
(2005) 1 sec 201 
Case Law Reference: 
Referred to 
Referred to 
Referred to 
Para 2, 9, 12 
Para 8, 10, 13 
Para 9, 12, 14 
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition Civil No. 
43 of 2006. 
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. 
D 
S.K. Bhattacharya, Niraj Boby Paonam for the Petitioner. 
T.R. Andhyarujina, K.K. Venugopal, Tara Chandra Sharma, 
A. Subhashini, Pranab Kumar Mullick, Kumar Mihir, Sanjeev 
Kumar (for Khaitan & Co.), Bijan Kumar Ghosh, Manjit Singh, 
E Kamal Mohan Gupta, H.K. Puri, P. Puri, V.M. Chauhan, A.K.S. 
Jain, A.D.N. Rao for the Respondents. 
F 
The following order of the Court was delivered 
ORDER 
Petitioner, who claims to be a public spirited person from 
the State of West Bengal and a member of the All India Legal 
Aid Forum, which is an organisation stated to be working for 
upliftment of the downtrodden, has filed the present Public 
G Interest Litigation claiming the following relief: 
(a) 
allow this writ petition and appoint a committee 
functioning under direct supervision of the court to 
scrutinize all the cases of discretionary allotments 
after due notice to the allottees and based upon this 
H 
committee's report issue a writ of and/or direction 
496 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2011) 2 S.C.R. 
A petitioner also submits that the issues raised in Writ Petition 
No. 7553 filed in the Calcutta High Court have not been settled 
by that Court or even by this Court. In his submissions, these 
issues require consideration being questions of great 
importance. 
B 
According to the petitioner, the Salt Lake City was the 
resl!lt of dream of the late Chief Minister Dr. B.C. Roy of 
establishing a new township for the lower and middle income 
groups on the eastern side of Calcutta (now Kolkata) and the 
C land to be used for that purpose was the reclaimed land of the 
Salt Lake. In the year 1967, a Master Plan was prepared under 
the Government instructions and the Government was expected 
to develop the area in accordance with that Master Plan which 
had, inter alia, made the following provisions: 
D 
"a) 
60% plots are earmarked as residential plots. 
b) 
Separate drainage and sewerage system. 
c) 
Open space to the tune of 12% 
E 
d) 
Location of commercial plots in one zone. 
F 
G 
H 
e) 
Location of few shop allowable plots meant to cater 
to the local needs of each residential plots. 
f) 
Roads on different types. 
g) 
Open space and other amenities such as Park. 
h) 
Separat
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.