Punjab-Haryana High Court
Mahender Singh vs Haryana Urban Development Authority & ... on 20 July, 2009
Author: Jasbir Singh
Bench: Jasbir Singh
C.W.P. No.5185 of 2007 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
C.W.P. No.5185 of 2007
Date of decision:20.07.2009.
Mahender Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
Haryana Urban Development Authority & others ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH
Present: Mr. P.K.Sachdeva, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Sikander Bakshi, Advocate,
for respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Mr. Taranveer Vashisth, Addl. A.G., Haryana,
for respondent No.3.
*****
JASBIR SINGH, J. (ORAL).
Petitioner was allotted a plot measuring 6.20 x 10.20 feet, out of discretionary quota, vide allotment letter dated 11.09.2003 (P-
5). Total price of the plot was fixed at Rs.30254/-. Petitioner was directed to accept the offer, through registered post, and further he was asked to send an amount of Rs.4751/-, within 30 days. It was further stipulated that balance amount shall be paid, in six yearly installments. Amount of first installment was to be paid after six months of the date of issuance of the allotment letter i.e. 11.09.2003.
It is case of the petitioner that on receipt of allotment letter, petitioner got prepared a demand draft, for an amount of Rs.4751/-, on 06.10.2003 (P-6) and he send it, through post, on 8.10.2003 (P-7), to the respondents. It appears that acceptance letter of the petitioner and the demand draft did not reach office of the respondents. It is a fact that above said demand draft was neither cancelled nor it was encashed by C.W.P. No.5185 of 2007 -2- the petitioner. This fact is apparent from a certificate dated 26.03.2009 issued by the concerned bank, which has been taken on record. For non-payment of dues, plot was cancelled, vide order dated 29.12.2004 (P-8). Hence, this writ petition.
Counsel for the parties heard.
It appears that the petitioner, at his level, made an effort to comply with conditions of the allotment letter. He got prepared a demand draft and sent it to the respondents, through post. His acceptance of allotment of the plot and the demand draft did not reach in the office of the respondents and appears to have been lost in the transit. Unless and until, the petitioner received any communication from the respondents, he can reasonably presume that allotment case is under process, may be on account of that fact, the petitioner failed to deposit amount of further installments. It is also a fact that the order Annexure P-8 was passed without issuance of any show cause notice to the petitioner. There is a complete violation of principle of natural justice.
In view of facts mentioned above, order dated 29.12.2004 (P-8) is set aside. This writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2, to reconsider case of the petitioner sympathetically, in view of the facts mentioned above, and pass a speaking order. Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is ready to pay interest and penalty, as permissible under the Act and Rules. Needful be done, within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
Copy of order be supplied dasti.
July 20, 2009. ( JASBIR SINGH ) vinod JUDGE