Transparent allotment of government land and limited development-plan modification powers are mandatory under Article 14 and Section 23-A.

State largesse, including allotment of government land, must be distributed transparently, rationally and without discrimination under Article 14; allotment made only on private requests, without public advertisement or invitation to similarly placed eligible entities, was held arbitrary and liable to be quashed. A statutory power to modify a development plan under Section 23-A of the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973, can be exercised only for the limited purposes expressly permitted by the provision; a change made solely to regularise an earlier impermissible allotment was ultra vires and quashed. The land was directed to be restored in conformity with the development plan.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the allotment of government land to a private trust-like body without advertisement or invitation to similarly placed eligible entities was arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution; (ii) whether the subsequent modification of the development plan and change of land use was within the scope of Section 23-A of the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973.

Issue (i): Whether the allotment of government land to a private trust-like body without advertisement or invitation to similarly placed eligible entities was arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

Analysis: State largesse, including allotment of land, must be distributed on a transparent, rational and non-discriminatory basis. The State cannot act on private requests alone or treat the process as a private arrangement. Where land is earmarked for allotment to educational, cultural, social or philanthropic bodies, equal opportunity requires that eligible persons be informed by advertisement or other recognized publicity so that competing claims may be considered. The allotment in question was not preceded by any public invitation for applications and was driven by select governmental decisions favourable to the beneficiary body.

Conclusion: The allotment was arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and was liable to be quashed.

Issue (ii): Whether the subsequent modification of the development plan and change of land use was within the scope of Section 23-A of the Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973.

Analysis: Section 23-A permits modification of a development plan only for the specific purposes stated in the provision, namely a proposed governmental project, a project relating to development of the State, a scheme of the Authority, or an activity or scheme beneficial to society in the statutory sense. The impugned modification was undertaken solely to facilitate the earlier allotment to the beneficiary body and not for any purpose sanctioned by the provision. The statutory procedure for modification could not validate a change made to give effect to an already completed and impermissible allotment.

Conclusion: The notifications modifying the development plan were ultra vires Section 23-A and were quashed.

Final Conclusion: The impugned allotment and the consequential change of land use were held unsustainable in law, and the land was ordered to be restored to use consistent with the development plan.

Ratio Decidendi: Government property or other public largesse must be allotted through a fair, transparent and non-arbitrary process consistent with Article 14, and a statutory power to modify a development plan can be used only for the limited purposes expressly permitted by the enactment.

---