Punjab-Haryana High Court
Dr.Surinder Nath Goel vs The State Of Punjab And Others on 10 August, 2010
Author: Surya Kant
Bench: Surya Kant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.14050 of 2010
Date of Decision : August 10, 2010.
Dr.Surinder Nath Goel .....Petitioner
versus
The State of Punjab and others .....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.
Present : Mr.Raj Kaushik, Advocate, for the petitioner.
-.-
1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
---
Surya Kant, J. (Oral)
Notice of motion.
Mr.H.S.Brar, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1.
Since the order which I propose to pass is not likely to cause any prejudice to the respondent-Trust, there is no need to issue any notice of motion to respondent Nos.2 & 3 at this stage, nor there is a need to seek any counter reply from respondent No.1 at this stage.
The petitioner seeks quashing of the demand notice dated 15.2.2010 (Annexure P-12) whereby he has been asked to deposit a sum of Rs.3.70 lacs towards enhanced price of the MIG flat allotted to him in the Model Town Extension Part-I Scheme by the Improvement Trust, C.W.P.No.14050 of 2010 2 Ludhiana.
Similar demand notices were issued to the other allottees, including one Rajinder Kumar Gautam who approached this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.4146 of 2010 (Rajinder Kumar Gautam versus The State of Punjab and others). Vide order dated 10.3.2010 (Annexure P14), the said writ petition was allowed in part at the motion stage to the extent that the demand notice dated 15.2.2010 was set-aside and the Improvement Trust, Ludhiana was directed to give necessary details to the allottee as to how the demanded amount was arrived at.
In my considered view, the order dated 10.3.2010 passed by this Court in Rajinder Kumar Gautam's case (supra), shall apply to all the similarly placed allottees. The present writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the Improvement Trust, Ludhiana to issue a fresh demand notice to the petitioner alongwith necessary details as to how the amount demanded from him/her has been arrived at.
Dasti.
August 10, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE