IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7335 of 1991 1. Gur Bilas Singh son of Late Gur Harakh Singh, resident of Road No. 7, Rajendra Nagar, Patna. 2. Dr. Gur Gyan Singh son of Late Gur Harakh Singh, resident of Rajendra Nagar, Patna. 3. Meera Rani Singh wife of Vishwanath Prasad Sinha, resident of North S. K. Puri, Patna. 4. Capt. Hari Kirti Singh son of Shambhu Prasad Singh, resident of S. K. Puri, Patna. 5. Shiva Kirti Singh son of Shambhu Prasad Singh, resident of S. K. Puri, Patna. 6. Parasnath Singh, s/o Late Rajeshwar Singh, Adalatganj, P.S. Kotwali, Patna. …. Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Bihar State Housing Board, through its Managing Director, Mangles Road, Patna. 3. The Manager Estate-cum-Additional Secretary, Bihar State Housing Board, Mangles Road, Patna. … Respondents. ----------- 15 10.2.2010 I.A. No. 2826 of 2000 For the reasons mentioned in this application seeking substitution of petitioner no.2, the same is allowed and his widow, namely, Most. Pratibha Singh is directed to be substituted in his place. I.A. No. 2826 of 2000 is allowed and the office is directed to make necessary correction in the cage column of the writ application. C.W.J.C. No. 7335 of 1991 2 In this application, a prayer has been made to the following effect:- “That the petitioners are all allotted land plots by the Bihar State Housing Board in Digha Area of Patna town and being aggrieved by allotment of infinitesimally small plots as compared to standard size of plots shown in the prospectus supplied with application forms sand fantastically arbitrary high price against their representation to charge price only on cost of acquisition plus cost of development, the petitioners, on receipt of letters of such allotment have been forced to move this Hon’ble Court through this writ application.” Mr. Tej Bahadur Singh, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners, has however at the outset submitted that due to long lapse of time, almost 19 to 20 years, the writ petitioners are no longer interested for allotment of plot from the Bihar State Housing Board (hereinafter to be referred to as ‘the Board’) and they would be satisfied if their initial payment of earnest money of Rs. 5,000/- each was returned back to them with interest at the rate of market rate. In this context, attention of this Court has been drawn to the materials on record showing that the Board despite acquiring land in Digha area of Patna town could not take its possession of such land on account of the dispute with the land holders and the encroachers and therefore, the 3 Board in all fairness having failed to allot the required size of land for which the writ petitioners had filed their writ application should itself have refunded earnest money along with interest at the prevailing market rate. It has also been submitted that the writ petitioners cannot be faulted for not accepting the allotment of smaller or truncated plots which was not in keeping with the terms of the prospectus, inasmuch as, they had applied for allotment of HIG plot measuring 450 Sq. meters whereas they were sought to be given plot measuring 1875 Sq. feet and that too in the area which never came into possession of the Board itself. Learned counsel had also pointed out that the cost of land as projected in the prospectus was also enhanced by arbitrary fixation of pricing and in such circumstance when the Board had failed to fulfill its promise and commitment as projected in the prospectus, the petitioners could not be deprived from return of their own amount with interest at the rate of market rate. Learned counsel for the Board on the other hand had submitted that the acquisition of land in Digha area of Patna town had became subject matter of dispute and litigation and as such either the reduced area of plot allotted 4 to the petitioners or the increased in price on account of delay on the part of the Board in the allotment and the consequential rise of cost in the acquisition of land was beyond the control of the Board and therefore, the petitioners would not be entitled for payment of any interest and the Board having offered smaller piece of land on the enhanced price could also not be directed to refund the earnest money and that too with interest. Having considered the materials on record as also the aforementioned submissions, this Court is satisfied that the Board on account of its own impediment had failed to allot the land for which the petitioners had applied and had deposited the earnest money of a sum of Rs. 5,000/-. This Court would not go into the pricing policy of the Board but then it would be clear that whatever was projected in the prospectus for the purposes of allotment of land in the year 1990-91 could not be fulfilled as the Board itself had failed to take possession of such acquired land for a long period of time. It is not in doubt that the Board has framed statutory regulations, Bihar State Housing Board (Management and Disposal of Housing Estates), Regulation, 5 1983 which was published in Bihar Gazette on 24.5.1983 under the Bihar State Housing Board Act & Rules which provides for payment of simple interest at the rate of 5% on the amount of earnest money and the same reads as follows:- 45. Simple interest at the rate of 5 per cent will be payable on the amount of earnest money deposited by the applicants, after the date of enforcement of this regulation. No interest will be payable on deposits made hereinabove. Thus, in keeping with the present scenario, this Court would only direct for refund of the earnest money of Rs. 5000/- deposited by each of petitioners along with simple interest at the rate of 5% per annum from the date of its deposit to the date of its refund to the petitioners. Such payment, however, must be made to the petitioners and/or their legal representatives within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observations and direction, this application is disposed of. Rishi (Dipak Misra, CJ.) (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)