Punjab-Haryana High Court
Swatanter Kumar vs Financial Commissioner on 28 January, 2013
Author: Surya Kant
Bench: Surya Kant
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.23247 of 2011
Date of Decision : January 28, 2013
Swatanter Kumar .....Petitioner
versus
Financial Commissioner, Revenue and others .....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.NAGRATH.
Present : Mr.Bhupinder Singh, Advocate, for
Mr.Pawan Kumar, Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr.Manoj Bajaj, Additional AG, Punjab.
-.-
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 mother of the petitioner (Smt.Leela Wati) was allotted plot No.3 in New Grain Mandi, Ajitwal, in an open auction held on 14.3.1972. She was required to construct a shop on the said plot within two years from the date of allotment order as was stipulated under condition No.14 of the allotment. No construction, however, was raised, for which a show cause notice dated 21.6.1978 by way of registered post was served upon her. The petitioner's mother submitted her reply dated 17.7.1978 which was not accepted. No construction was raised even thereafter and second show cause notice dated 6.2.1979 was issued, followed by another notice dated 2.8.1982 to which again the allottee submitted her reply. Since construction was not raised even thereafter, the authorities after issuing one or the other notices finally cancelled the allotment and resumed the site vide order dated 20.9.2000 (Annexure P-3). The mother of the petitioner passed away on CWP No.23247 of 2011 [2] 10.3.2000. The petitioner's father then preferred an appeal against the cancellation of allotment which was dismissed by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 31.10.2007. The father of the petitioner is said to have executed a registered Will in favour of the petitioner and on that basis the petitioner sought his impleadment in the pending appeal and thereafter preferred revision petition before the Financial Commissioner (Revenue), Punjab as his father also appears to have died during that period. The revision petition was also dismissed observing that the plot was allotted in the year 1972 and was cancelled after 28 years due to non-construction though the construction was required to be completed within two years of allotment.
The aggrieved petitioner has approached this Court. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records.
The petitioner's contention that a proper show cause notice was not issued or that the principles of natural justice were violated, cannot be accepted for the reason that series of show cause notices including those sent by registered post, were duly served upon the allottee and then details are mentioned in the resumption order. There is no plausible explanation as to why the shop was not constructed for 28 years. The very purpose for establishing a new grain market would be defeated if the desired development does not take place. It appears that the plot was not constructed for speculated reasons, hence no fault can be found with the impugned cancellation order.
Faced with this, learned counsel for the petitioner urges that the petitioner had expressed his willingness to construct the site before the Revisional Authority as well as before this Court.
In our considered view, if the petitioner is bonafidely interested to own a shop in the new grain market at Ajitwal, the appropriate recourse for him would be to apply to the authorities for re-allotment of the said site.
CWP No.23247 of 2011 [3]Mr.Manoj Bajaj, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from Mr.Joginder Singh, Legal Assistant, Colonization Department, Punjab, informs that a fresh auction of some of the un-allotted shop-sites is likely to be held within 2-3 months as there are 4 sites still lying un-allotted.
In view of the above-noticed factual scenario, we deem it appropriate in the interest of justice and equity, to direct the respondents that whatever highest price would be fetched from the similar shop sites (of same size) in the near future auction, the petitioner may be offered re-allotment of the shop in question at the same rate and on same terms and conditions. If the petitioner agrees, the plot shall be re-allotted to him within two weeks of his acceptance of offer subject to the same terms and conditions as will be applicable on the new allottees. However, if the petitioner declines to accept such offer the authorities shall be at liberty to put the plot in question for fresh auction.
The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. Dasti.
$
(SURYA KANT)
JUDGE
$
January 28, 2013 (R.P.NAGRATH)
Mohinder JUDGE