Administrative Law

Navjyoti Co-operative Housing Society v. Union of India

AIR 1993 SC 155

Facts

Delhi Administration reopened registration of group housing societies for DDA land allotment.
Earlier practice was to allot land on the basis of seniority from date of registration.
Later, an Office Memorandum changed the criterion to date of approval of papers by the Registrar.
Societies challenged this sudden change.

Whether the Government could suddenly change the allotment criterion despite a consistent past practice.

The Court found that the societies had a legitimate expectation that seniority would be based on date of registration.
This expectation was not imaginary.
It was based on:
DDA’s earlier consistent practice;
public communication/brochure;
the way societies had organised themselves after registration.
The societies may not have had a private law right to allotment of land.
But in public law, they had a right to expect that the administration would act fairly and consistently.
The new policy changed the basis of seniority after societies had already entered the process.
This could push older registered societies behind later societies merely because approval of documents happened later.
The Court said this defeated fairness.
No compelling public interest was shown for changing the criterion.
The authority also did not give affected societies a proper chance to represent before changing the policy.

The Supreme Court quashed the changed criterion.
It held that allotment should continue on the earlier basis of seniority from date of registration.
The case is important because it shows that legitimate expectation can arise from past practice, even without a formal promise.
Use this case for: sudden policy change defeating settled expectation can be arbitrary under Article 14 unless justified by overriding public interest.
MP Jain notes that Navjyoti is a key Indian case where group housing societies were held entitled to legitimate expectation from consistent past allotment practice.