MOHD. YASIN Vs ST. STEPHENS COLLEGE -Judgment by Delhi High Court

2024-01-31 Information

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of order : 31st January, 2024.
+ CM APPL. No. 61492/2023 and CM APPL. Nos.61493/2023, 4021/2024 and 5801/2024 IN W.P.(C) 4839/2013

MOHD. YASIN ….. Petitioner
Through: Mr.N.D.Pancholi, Advocate

versus

ST. STEPHENS COLLEGE ….. Respondent
Through: Mr.Romy Chacko, Advocate

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH

ORDER

CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J (Oral)
CM APPL. No. 61492/2023
1. The present application bearing under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, has been filed on behalf of the petitioner/applicant seeking the following reliefs:
�In view of above it is prayed that the above writ petition WP)C) 4839/2013 may kindly be revived. In terms of order dated 23.05.2023 (Annexure AA-I). It is prayed accordingly.�

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner/applicant submitted that the petitioner had raised an industrial dispute before the Industrial Tribunal, whereby, the Tribunal was tasked with deciding whether the act of the present respondent to ask the petitioner to vacate quarter no. 2, which he is in occupation of, is justified or not. The Industrial Tribunal had rejected the petitioner�s case on 16th May, 2013 by holding that there was no industrial dispute between the parties and that the government was not competent to refer the dispute.
3. It is submitted that being aggrieved by the above mentioned award, the petitioner had filed the instant writ petition challenging the said award. Rule was issued by the Predecessor Bench of this Court on 25th September, 2014 and it was ordered that the respondent management shall maintain status quo till the disposal of the writ.
4. It is submitted that during the pendency of the present writ petition, the petitioner workman became entitled to a staff quarter on the basis of seniority in the year 2015, but the respondent management did not allot him any quarter in-spite of repeated demands.
5. It is also submitted that, however, in the midst of correspondence, the respondent offered the petitioner quarter no. D-6 vide letter dated 19th November, 2019, however, the same was subject to the condition of him getting clearance from this Court.
6. It is further submitted that the petitioner vide his reply dated 2nd January, 2020 requested the respondent that he may be allotted quarter no. D-6 along with separate toilet and bathroom. In response to the same, the respondent reiterated its earlier condition vide another letter dated 21st April, 2020; to which the petitioner responded vide letter dated 15th May, 2020, thereby, informing that there is no provision of getting clearance from this Court, however, the respondent did not agree to the same.
7. It is submitted that the petitioner then filed an application bearing CM No. 7692/2021 for directing the respondent to allot him quarter no. D-11 or D-6 subject to the condition that bathroom and toilet are constructed in quarter no. D-6 or in the alternative the allotment of quarter no. P-2 which is already in occupation of the petitioner workman may be confirmed in favour of the petitioner workman. However, on 11th May, 2023, the management offered quarter no. D-25 or D-26 to the petitioner in lieu of staff quarter no. P-2 which is already in occupation of the petitioner workman.
8. It is submitted that on 23rd May, 2023, the petitioner workman agreed to the allotment of quarter no. D-25 subject to the condition that D-25 was in a habitable condition and in view of the same, the Predecessor Bench of this Court vide the order of even date disposed of the captioned writ petition.
9. It is submitted that pursuant to the aforesaid order, the petitioner workman wrote an application dated 25th May, 2023, to the principal of the respondent College in which he had requested for modification qua the certain amenities. In response to the same, the respondent on 1st June, 2023 asked the petitioner to inspect the quarter no. D-25.
10. It is submitted that upon inspection of the above said quarter, it was found that the same is not in a habitable condition as the moisture was seeping through the walls, rain water entering the premises, there is neither bathroom nor any kitchen in the quarter, the walls were damaged and no white washing was done and the same is in violation of the direction of the Predecessor Bench of this Court.
11. It is submitted that upon informing the respondent College about the above conditions, the respondent College replied stating that they have been instructed to only carry out white washing and some minor repairs. The Estate Officer of the College also informed the petitioner that they were not prepared to carry out the repairs as required by the petitioner.
12. It is further submitted that the petitioner filed an application dated 2nd June, 2023 before the respondent stating that he is not ready to accept the quarter no. D-25 as the same was not fully habitable and requested the respondent to allot him either quarter no. D-7 or D-11 as quarter no. D-7 was going to be vacated and quarter no. D-11 was lying vacant since last four years. Another application dated 22nd June, 2023 was also made, but to no avail.
13. It is submitted that even after making multiple requests, the respondent College remained non-responsive to the heeds of the petitioner. It is further submitted that, in the interregnum, the petitioner�s daughter fell sick due to the unhealthy and uninhabitable condition of the current residing quarter no. P-2.
14. It is submitted that being aggrieved by the above, the petitioner has filed the instant application seeking revival of the captioned writ petition in terms of the directions passed in the order dated 23rd May, 2023 by the Predecessor Bench of this Court.
15. Therefore, it is submitted that in view of the foregoing paragraphs, the instant application may be allowed and the reliefs be granted, as prayed for.
16. Per Contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent vehemently opposed the instant application submitting to the effect that the same is liable to be dismissed being devoid of any merits.
17. It is submitted that though it is correct that the petitioner became eligible to a staff quarter on the basis of seniority in the year 2015, however, the petitioner refused to take the accommodation that was offered to him.
18. It is submitted that the petitioner was offered a choice between quarter no. D-2 and D-37 on 26th June, 2019, a choice between quarter no. D-2 or D-6 on 21st September, 2019, and a choice between quarter no. D-25 or D-26 on 11th May, 2023.
19. It is submitted that it is surprising that the petitioner has repeatedly rejected the choice of offered quarters by citing frivolous and untrue facts in an attempt to continue occupying quarter no. P-2 illegally. The petitioner�s unwillingness to reach a settlement also indicates his propensity to prolong his illegal occupation of the said quarter.
20. It is submitted that the petitioner was offered quarter no. D-6 on 21st September, 2019 which he did not take up at the relevant time, therefore, it is surprising that the petitioner requested for the same quarter that he had refused earlier. This clearly shows that the actions of the petitioner were designed to prolong his illegal occupation of quarter no. P-2
21. It is submitted that the demands made by the petitioner are unreasonable and an attempt to nullify the order passed by the Predecessor bench of this Court vide order dated 23rd May, 2023. The said order does not permit the demands made by the petitioner.
22. It is submitted that quarter no. D-25 is part of a block of quarters that consists of four other quarters, three of which are currently occupied by staff members belonging to the same employment category. All five quarters are of similar vintage, facilities, and maintenance. Separate toilet and kitchen is provided for each of the quarters. Therefore, the statements made by the petitioner are blatantly untrue. Furthermore, cleanup and renovation work is done as per the reasonable inputs that are provided by the occupant after the acceptance letter is submitted. This is done in order to avoid wasteful expenditure on unoccupied property in case the offer is not accepted.
23. It is further submitted that over the years, the respondent has made several offers to the petitioner, however, the petitioner has refused all the offers citing reasons that are frivolous and untrue in an attempt to prolong his illegal occupation of quarter no. P-2 which was originally intended for the Principal�s Staff.
24. The learned counsel for the respondent contended that the respondent College is sympathetic to the health condition of the petitioner�s daughter, however, it is upto the petitioner to take up the offer of alternate accommodation that has been already made to him and still stands.
25. Therefore, in view of the foregoing submissions, it is submitted that the instant application may be dismissed.
26. In rejoinder, it has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner/applicant that he became eligible for a quarter in the year 2015 on the basis of seniority and thereafter, quarter nos. C-5, D-6, D-7, and D-11 fell vacant, but the respondent did not offer those quarters to the petitioner except D-6 but that also on the condition that the petitioner at first should withdraw the present writ petition.
27. It is submitted that the respondent has offered only those quarters to the petitioner which are not fit for habitation and which have been rejected by the other employees as well. Quarters D-25 and D-26, which were offered by the respondent to the petitioner/applicant, are lying vacant since the last one year as no employee is prepared to take them.
28. It is also submitted that the petitioner/applicant has his right to decline the quarters which are not suitable for him and his family and therefore, respondent cannot force him to accept a quarter which is not in a habitable condition.
29. Heard and perused the record including the order dated 23rd May, 2023 passed by the Predecessor Bench of this Court.
30. It has been submitted that vide the order dated 23rd May, 2023, the respondent was directed to hand over the possession of quarter no. D-25 to the petitioner and was further directed to ensure that the same is made fully habitable and is freshly white washed. It has also been submitted that vide the above said order, the captioned writ petition was disposed of, however, the Predecessor Bench of this Court had duly held that in the event, the petitioner does not find the afore mentioned quarter in a habitable state, it shall be open to him to move an appropriate application before the Principal, St. Stephens College, i.e., the respondent, however, in case, the petitioner does not receive any positive response, he will be at liberty to seek revival of the present petition.
31. By way of the instant application, the petitioner has sought revival of the captioned writ petition on the ground that even after addressing various letters to the respondent College, it has failed to allot a inhabitable quarter to the petitioner and the same is in violation of the order dated 23rd May, 2023 passed by the Predecessor Bench of this Court. Hence, the petitioner has approached this Court.
32. In rival contentions, it has been submitted on behalf of the respondents that the petitioner has repeatedly rejected the choice of quarters that has been offered to him by the respondent citing frivolous reasons and the same is merely an attempt to continue occupying quarter no. P-2 illegally. The petitioner, since inception, has been unwilling to reach a settlement and the same indicates his propensity to prolong his illegal occupation of the quarter occupied by him at the moment. It has been argued that quarter no. D-25 is part of a block of quarters and separate toilet and kitchen is provided for each quarter therein. In light of the same, the contentions advanced by the petitioner are baseless and the instant application, being devoid any merits is liable to be dismissed.
33. At this juncture, it is apposite to reproduce the relevant portion of order dated 23rd May, 2023:
�1. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions from the petitioner who is present in Court, submits that the petitioner is willing to vacate Staff Quarter No.P-2 and instead occupy Staff Quarter No.D-25. He submits that this would, however, be subject to the Staff Quarter No.D-25 being in a habitable condition.

2. Learned counsel for the respondent assures the Court that the Staff Quarter No.D-25 is in a fully habitable state and has an attached bathroom as well.

3. In the light of this stand taken by the respondent, the petitioner, who is present in Court, undertakes to vacate Staff Quarter No.P-2 within a period four weeks from today and instead occupy No. D-25 Staff Quarters, St. Stephens College, New Delhi.

4. In the light of this stand taken by the parties, nothing further survives for adjudication in the petition, which is, accordingly, disposed of.

5. The respondent would, however, ensure that petitioner is handed over possession of Quarter No.D-25 and the same is made fully habitable and is freshly white washed.

6. Needless to state, in case, the petitioner finds that Staff Quarter No.D- 25 is still not in a habitable state, it will be open for the petitioner to move an appropriate application before the Principal, St.Stephens College. However, in case, the same does not evoke a positive response, the petitioner will be at liberty to seek revival of the present petition��

34. A perusal of the above indicates that the respondent was directed to handover the possession of quarter no. D-25 to the petitioner and the respondent was further directed to ensure that the said quarter is to be made fully habitable and freshly white washed. Also, whilst disposing of the captioned writ petition, it was held that in case the petitioner finds quarter no. D-25 uninhabitable and upon addressing the same to the respondent, if no positive response is received; the petitioner was at liberty to seek revival of the writ petition.
35. It is observed by this Court that the above mentioned directions were passed on the basis of undertaking given by the petitioner. The petitioner had undertaken to vacate the staff quarter no. P-2 and instead occupy quarter no. D-25 within a period of four weeks from the date of passing of the above said order. Accordingly, on the basis of the said undertaking, the petition was disposed off and the above stated directions were made by the Predecessor Bench of this Court.
36. After perusing the counter and the rejoinder filed on behalf of the parties and the contents made in the application, this Court is of the view that the petitioner had failed to vacate quarter no. P-2, thereby, violating his undertaking given before the Predecessor Bench of this Court. Admittedly, the liberty given to the petitioner was on the premise that he shall vacate the above said quarter and instead occupy quarter no. D-25 within a prescribed time period.
37. The respondent has submitted before this Court that D-25 is part of a block of quarters consisting of four other quarters and all the five quarters including �D-25� are of similar vintage, facilities and maintenance. It has also been submitted that separate toilet and kitchen is provided for in each of the quarters.
38. It has been further stated by the respondent in their reply to the instant application that the cleanup and touch up work is done as per the reasonable inputs that are provided by the occupant after the acceptance letter is submitted. The respondent has submitted that the same is the due procedure and is done in order to avoid wasteful expenditure on unoccupied property in case the offer to occupy a particular quarter is not accepted.
39. Taking into consideration the above stated submissions made by the respondent and the violation of the undertaking given by the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the petitioner has failed to adhere to his undertaking. There is nothing on record produced by the petitioner that he had submitted the acceptance letter to occupy quarter no. D-25.
40. As far as the reliefs sought by the petitioner are concerned, this Court is of the view that the petitioner cannot be held to be entitled to any right to seek a government accommodation as per his choice and convenience. There is no rule or law in favour of the petitioner which would imply that he has a vested right to make demands qua the choice of an accommodation/quarter. In this regard, the petitioner has been unable to make out his case to show his inherent right to make demands for renovation and other changes in the quarter offered to him in order to invoke the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court.
41. The acts of the petitioner tantamount to violation of his undertaking and this Court is not inclined to allow the present application considering that the petitioner, has himself, utterly failed to comply with the observations and directions made in the aforementioned order and also in the absence of any law in the favour of the petitioner.
42. Therefore, in view of the observations made in the aforementioned paragraphs and considering that the petitioner does not has a vested right to seek any renovation or an accommodation/quarter of his choice, it is held that no ground of revival of the writ petition is being made out.
43. Hence, in view of the aforesaid terms, I do not find any merit in the instant application.
44. Accordingly, the present application along with other accompanying pending applications, stand dismissed.
45. The Order be uploaded on the website forthwith.

CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J
JANUARY 31, 2024
SV/RYP/AV
Click here to check corrigendum, if any