Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sat Pal Gupta & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors on 2 March, 2009
Author: Surya Kant
Bench: Surya Kant
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
C.W.P. No. 19298 of 2007.
Date of Decision: 2nd March, 2009.
Sat Pal Gupta & Ors. Petitioners
through
Mr. R.K.Garg, Advocate
Versus
Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents
through Mr. K.K.Gupta, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT.
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) The petitioners seek quashing of the order dated 5.11.2007 [Annexure P-5] whereby the respondents have asked them to deposit additional amount of Rs.3,39,747/- towards penalty for surrendering the plot No. 145, Sector 40-A, Chandigarh.
The petitioners were the highest bidders in the auction held on 10.12.2004. The allotment letter was issued in their favour on 29.12.2004 and on the same day, possession was also offered. The petitioners, however, surrendered the plot on 16.2.2005. Their request was accepted on 6.4.2005 and they were permitted to surrender the site on payment of 2.5% of the premium as penalty along with interest till the date of surrender.
The petitioners thereafter have been asked to deposit additional amount of Rs.3,39,747/- towards penalty for surrender on the premise that under Rule 7A of the Chandigarh [Sale of Sites and Buildings] Rules, 1960, the surrender of the site by them was permissible on payment of 5% of the premium as penalty. Aggrieved, the petitioners have approached this Court.
The solitary question which requires consideration is as to whether, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, sub- Rule [1] or sub-Rule [2] of Rule 7A of the 1960 Rules would be attracted. Rule 7A[1] and [2] of the 1960 Rules reads as follows:-
"Rule 7-A Surrender of site:-
[1] The transferee who has already paid at least 25% premium of the site, may, before he is offered possession of the site by the Estate Officer, and within 180 days of the allotment of the site, whichever is earlier, surrender the site on payment of 2.5% of the premium as penalty. In this event, interest at the rate prescribed in rule 10[1] shall be chargeable on the balance premium due from the transferee for the period from the date of allotment up to the date of surrender. The date of the surrender under these rules shall be the date when intimation by transferee to this effect reaches the Estate Officer. [2] An transferee as mentioned in sub-rule [1] above, may surrender the site within two years of the date of allotment on payment of 5% of the premium as penalty. Interest shall be chargeable from the transferee as provided in sub-rule [1] above. The Estate Officer shall be competent to decide such cases, as also cases under sub-rule [1]".
From a plain reading of the Rule, it is apparent that if an allottee surrenders the site within 180 days of the allotment but before he is offered possession, he would be liable to pay 2.5% of the premium as penalty. However, if possession has been offered to him or if he surrenders the site within two years from the date of allotment, in that event, he would be liable to pay 5% of the premium as penalty. In the case of the petitioners, it is not in dispute that on 29.12.2004 itself possession was offered to them. Sub-Rule [1] of Rule 7-A, therefore, would not be attracted as the surrender made by the petitioners, though within 180 days, was not before the offer of possession. The respondents, are, therefore, well within their right to ask the petitioners to pay 5% of the premium as penalty along with interest till the date of surrender of the plot in terms of sub-rule [2] of Rule 7A. Similar view has been taken by a Division Bench of this Court in Daljit Singh & Ors. V Union Territory, Chandigarh & Anr., CWP No. 2964 of 2008 decided on 3.12.2008.
For the reasons assigned by the Division Bench in Daljit Singh's case [supra], the petitioners' prayer for re-allotment of the site also can not be entertained. However, it is clarified that the petitioners shall not be charged interest after the date of surrender.
Disposed of.
March 2, 2009. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE