I.L. DHINGRA & ORS. versus STATE OF U.P. & ORS.

I.L. DHINGRA & ORS. versus STATE OF U.P. & ORS.

Reservations in favour of persons whose land had been acquired, NOIDA entrepreneurs and their employees, employees of NOIDA, and nominees of HUDCO are justifiable; reservations for political sufferers and employees of Central Government, Government of India Public Undertakings and International Organisations are not justified. Relief is denied to petitioners for lack of promptitude except as already granted via interim orders; housing scheme allotments made pursuant to the court's interim orders stand confirmed.

Parties
Petitioners: I.L. Dhingra & Ors.; Respondents: State of U.P. & Ors.; Interveners: Interveners
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
06 April 1987
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (original Jurisdiction) Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India / Final Disposal
Outcome
All writ petitions dismissed, but subject to allotments already made pursuant to the Supreme Court's interim orders.
Legal Topics
Reservation Policy, Urban/industrial Development, Housing Schemes, Equality Before Law (article 14)
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Land Law Reservation Policy Urban/industrial Development Housing Schemes Equality Before Law (article 14)

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

I.L. Dhingra & Ors.

Petitioners

State of U.P. & Ors.

Respondents

Interveners

Interveners

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition (original Jurisdiction) Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India / Final Disposal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Validity of reservation of allotment of houses by NOIDA in favour of certain categories (such as political sufferers, employees of governments/public sector/international organisations, entrepreneurs, persons whose land was acquired, nominees of HUDCO) under LIG-EWS and MIG housing schemes.
  2. 2 Whether such reservations violate Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Ratio Decidendi

Reservations in favour of persons whose land had been acquired, NOIDA entrepreneurs and their employees, employees of NOIDA, and nominees of HUDCO are justifiable; reservations for political sufferers and employees of Central Government, Government of India Public Undertakings and International Organisations are not justified. Relief is denied to petitioners for lack of promptitude except as already granted via interim orders; housing scheme allotments made pursuant to the court's interim orders stand confirmed.

Court Disposition

All writ petitions dismissed, but subject to allotments already made pursuant to the Supreme Court's interim orders.

Orders

  • Allotments already made to petitioners in Writ Petition No. 228 of 1981 and Writ Petition Nos. 2293-97 of 1982 to stand; no further orders necessary.
  • All other writ petitions dismissed; benefits accrued under court orders will stand.