- (1.) THE petitioner, who is a Government servant, applied for grant of house building advance to the Collector, Jodhpur in the year 1983. THE claim of the petitioner is that he waited for sanction of the house building advance for years together but the house building advance was not sanctioned to him. However, a letter dated 6.7.1996 was received from the Collectorate, Jodhpur asking him to complete certain formalities. He was informed that unless he fulfils all the requirement as required vide the aforesaid letter, he will loose his seniority, which is maintained for grant of house building advance.
(2.) THE Municipal Board, Phalodi had issued a Public Notice for sale of various abadi plots at Adarsh Nagar, Phalodi. As per the requirement of the letter issued by the Collector (Awas), Jodhpur the petitioner had to enter into an agreement for purchase of plot. As per requirement of letter dated 6.7.1996 the petitioner purchased Plot No. 133 in Sector 2, Adarsh Nagar, Phalodi for a sum of Rs. 77,000/- on 24.7.1996. As per terms of sale of the municipal plot, the petitioner had to deposit earnest money of Rs. 1,000/- and 1/4th amount of cost of the plot amounting to Rs. 19,250/-. The requirement of the Municipal Board, Phalodi was that remaining 3/4th amount of cost was to be deposited within one month from the date of purchase i.e. 24.7.1996. The petitioner claims that after completing all the requirements, he approached the Collector for disbursement of the loan for purchase of the plot. Petitioner was waiting for reply. Unfortunately he did not receive any response from the Collector, Jodhpur. He had to deposit the remaining 3/4th amount of cost of the plot after arranging it from private persons with great difficulty. If this amount had not been deposited within time i.e. before 24.8.1996 the petitioner would have lost the plot and the earnest money and other deposits made by him would have also been forfeited. It was within the notice of the respondents that the petitioner was required to deposit the remaining 3/4th amount within one month i.e. upto 24.8.1996. The loan was not disbursed to petitioner in time. The Collector, Jodhpur ordered for disbursement of house loan amount by the order dt.28.1.1997. A copy of the order of disbursement has been produced on the record as Annex. 7. According to this order the petitioner was sanctioned a total house building advance of Rs.1,06,875 out of which an amount of Rs. 33,200/- was disbursed to the petitioner fur purchase of the plot. After deposit of the full price of the plot, a registered sale-deed was executed by the Municipal Board, Phalodi in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner deposited the original sale-deed with the respondent and created equitable mortage by deposit the original title in security of the house building advance sanctioned in favour of the petitioner. While the petitioner was waiting to receive the other instalment of loan amount he received a letter dated 22.8.1997 from the Collector, Jodhpur informing him that he had not given intimation regarding the deposit of Rs. 57,750/- made by him. Since the full amount has been deposited by the petitioner before sanction of the loan, the loan for purchase of the plot is not liable to be disbursed to the petitioner. The petitioner was informed that he is required to repay the amount of loan paid for purchase of the plot alongwith penal interest.
(3.) THE petitioner replied to the said notice on 19.9.1997 and explained that loan was disbursed after six month and he had to compulsorily deposit the remaining 3/4th amount within one month. He has not intentionally committed any default. A communication was again received by the petitioner on 6.10.1997 to the effect that he has to return the loan amount with interest. The petitioner has given a legal notice and thereafter filed the present writ petition claiming that the petitioner had to spend the amount on purchase of the plot and deposit the same within time so as to save the allotment of plot from being cancelled. Since the sanctioning of the loan to the petitioner has been done after inordinate delay, the petitioner was to go for private loans. The default which has been committed by the petitioner is a technical default and on this score the petitioner cannot be asked to return the disbursed loan with interest. Further the petitioner is entitled loan with interest. Further the petitioner is entitled to receive the remaining amount of loan ordered to be disbursed to the petitioner. The respondents have joined the issue and have claimed that the petitioner was not entitled to receive the amount disbursed to him for purchase of the plot. He had never informed the office of the answering respondents that the petitioner was required to deposit the remaining 3/4th amount on a particular date being the last date for depositing the amount. The petitioner could have applied for extension of time for depositing the amount and could have accordingly informed the respondents. Since the petitioner has done every thing without informing the respondents he is not entitled to any leniency and the amount having been arranged by the petitioner on his own accord, the petitioner is not entitled to loan facility. ;