Special Planning Authority vs Pranabandhu Sahoo

THE Special Planning Authority, Keonjhar has filed this appeal challenging the impugned direction given by the District Forum to it to register the sale deed in respect of the disputed land in favour of the respondent No. 1.

THE respondent No. 1 filed the complaint on the following allegations: His case is that the appellant allotted him plot No. MIG -15 under revenue plot No. 250 of Khata No. 67 of village Jagannathpur under Keonjhar Tahasil. As required by the appellant, he deposited a sum of Rs. 12,000/ - in three instalments as earnest money. He was given possession of the land on 31.1.1992. He took loan from the State Bank of India for construction of his house. Although, he was given possession, the appellant did not execute the sale deed. His prayer is, therefore, for direction to the appellant to execute the sale deed. The appellant in its counter stated that request was made to the Executive Officer, Keonjhar Debottar for alienation of Ac. 7.081 decimals of land of Debottar land situated in village Jagannathpur in favour of the Special Planning Authority, Keonjhar. In its meeting held by the Special Planning Authority dated 6.11.1985, it was decided that the aforesaid extent of land would be alienated at the rate of rupees two lakhs per acre, and its price would be paid in three instalments. The Executive Officer, Keonjhar Debottar accordingly applied to the Commissioner of Endowments, Bhubaneswar for grant of permission who in O.A. No. 9 of 1986, permitted for alienation. The Executive Officer, Keonjhar Debottar did not take any action for implementation of the order of the Endowment Commissioner. As it was for a temporary period, it lapsed. Although, application has been made to the Commissioner of Endowments for revalidation of permission, no order has yet been communicated. In the circumstances, since title in respect of the land had not been conferred on the appellant, no sale deed is possible to be executed in favour of the respondent No. 1. 3A. The District Forum without examining the legal position has directed the appellant to execute the sale deed.

THE impugned direction of the District Forum is not legally sustainable. Valid sale deed can be executed by a seller if he has title to the property. Admittedly, the land in question is a Debottar property. Therefore, without permission from the Endowment Commissioner for alienation of the land in favour of the appellant, he cannot be held to have derived title in respect of the land. The appellant is a statutory authority and not a private individual. It is not supposed to do anything contrary to law. Therefore, the respondent No. 1 should not have rushed to the District Forum by filing a complaint. In our opinion, as the situation at present stands, the respondent No. 1 has no cause of action.

IN course of hearing, orders dated 26.9.2001 passed by this Commission in C.D. Appeal Nos. 157 of 1997 and 158 of 1997 were shown to us. In those two appeals similar orders as in the present case passed by the District Forum were challenged by the Special Planning Authority, Keonjhar. This Court disposed of the matter by observing that the complainant could only approach the Consumer Forum afresh after the Special Planning Authority obtains title in its favour. In view of what has been stated above, the impugned order of the District Forum is hereby set aside. Complaint filed by the respondent No. 1 stands dismissed.

IN the result, the appeal is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Mr. Subash Mahtab, Member -I agree. Appeal allowed.