Supreme Court - Daily Orders
State Of Haryana vs Rajesh Garg on 22 January, 2025
Author: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha
Bench: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). OF 2025
[@ SLP (C) No(s)________ OF 2025]
[@ Diary No(s). 1604/2024]
RAJESH GARG & ANR. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. Respondent(s)
O R D E R
1. Delay condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. These appeals by way of special leave arise out of the judgment and order of the High Court in Civil Writ Petition Nos. 12376 and 12129 of 2022 dated 07.08.2023.
4. The plot(s) in question were allotted by respondent(s)- authorities (Haryana Urban Development Authority) in favour of the original allottees on 05.09.2008 and 15.09.2008 respectively. Subsequently, these original allottees transferred the said plots in favour of the present appellant(s) vide separate allotment letters issued by the respondent(s)-authorities on request being made to that effect by the original allottees on 13.08.2010 and 24.06.2010.
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by KAPIL TANDON
5. Date: 2025.01.30 17:07:37 IST Reason: Appellant(s) deposited some amounts as part of installments, however, due to certain factors relating to health issues and 1 personal difficulties including an unfortunate death in family, the appellant(s) could not deposit further installments. For non- payment of the balance, the allotments made in their favour were cancelled and orders of resumption were passed on 13.02.2018 and 16.02.2018. The orders of resumption are extracted herein below for ready reference.
6. The Resumption Order dated 13.02.2018 is as follows:-
"ESTATE OFFICER OFFICE: HUDA, SECTOR-20, PART-2 SIRSA PHONE NO.01666-247135, FAX NO.01666-247135 EMAIL: [email protected] ORDER Memo No.249 Dated: 13/2/18.
Plot No. 2691 Sector-20, P-III, Sirsa was allotted in the name of Smt.Rajender Kumar son of sh. Madan lal Sangwan Cloth house, Fatehabad vide this office Memo No.8078 dated 05.09.2008. Further above said plot was transferred in favor of Sh. Rajesh Gang Sio Sh. TL Garg & Ashashwani Mittal S/o Sh. Santosh Kumar Mittal # 1600 Urban Estate, Jind vide this office Memo No. 24896 dated 13.08.2010.
As per condition no. 4 of the re-allotment letter, it was incumbent to pay the installment/ Enhancement on due date, but they did not deposit the due amount. Thereafter, the following registered notices under section 17 of HUDA Act for recovery of a sum of Rs. 4423833-on account of due amount were served.
6. U/S 17(1) issued vide this Memo No. 0001293 dated 15.07.2016.
7. U/S 17(2) to bearing issued vide this Memo No. 00345 dated 15.09.2016.
8. U/S 17 (Penalty notice) issued vide this Memo No. 00037 dated 25.10.2017.
9. U/S 17(3) issued vide this Memo No. 00023 dated 16.06.2017.2
10. U/S 17(4) to personal hearing issued vide this Memo No.0003135 dated 05.09.2017.
Additional opportunity for pay was also given to the re-allottee vide this Memo. 359 dated 30.11.2017 but neither turned up for hearing and nor deposited the balance amount.
It is clear from the facts that the re- allottee has made willful default in making the payments of the out-standing dues. I am, therefore, of the opinion that Sh. Rajesh Gang S/o Sh. TL. Garg & Ashashwani Mittal S/o Sh. Santosh Kumar Mittal # 1600 Urban Estate, Jind have violated the terms and conditions of allotment letter by not making the payment. Hence, I order the resumption of the residential Plot No. 2691 Sector 20P-III Sirsa under power. conferred upon me under section- 17 of the HUDA Act. I also order the forfeiture 10% of the consideration money, interest and penalty etc. out of the amount deposited by them.
Sd/-Estate Officer, HUDA, Sirsa
7. The Resumption Order dated 16.02.2018 is as follows:-
OFFICE: HUDA, SECTOR-20, PART-2 SIRSA PHONE NO.01666-247135, FAX NO.01666-247135 EMAIL: [email protected] ORDER Memo No.498 Dated: 16/2/18.
Plot No. 2767 P Sector-20, P-II, Sirsa was allotted in the name of Smt. Krishna W/o Sh. Shyam Singh # 624/5 Pir Wall Gall, Road, Rohtak vide this office Merno No.8888 dated 15.09.2008. Further above said plot was transferred in favor of Sh. Rajesh Gang S/o Sh. TL. Garg & Sh. Sunil S/o Sh. Ram Kishan # 1600 Urban Estate, Jind vide this office Memo No. 21382 dated 24.06.2010.
As per condition no. 4 of the re-allotment letter, it was incumbent to pay the installment/ Enhancement on due date, but they did not deposit the due amount. Thereafter the following registered notices under section 17 of HUDA Act for recovery of a sum of Rs. 3136335/-on account of due amount were served.3
1. U/S 17(1) issued vide this Memo No. 0001080 dated 12.07.2016.
2. U/S 17(2) to bearing issued vide this Memo No. 00382 dated 15.09.2016.
3. U/S 17 (Penalty notice) issued vide this Memo No. 000249 dated 09.03.2017.
4. U/S 17(3) issued vide this Memo No. 00024 dated 10.06.2017.
5. U/S 17(4) to personal hearing issued vide this Memo No.0003127 dated 05.09.2001.
Additional opportunity for pay was also given to the re-allottee vide this Memo. 3590 dated 30.11.2017 but neither turned up for hearing and, nor deposited the balance amount.
It is clear from the facts that the re- allottee has made willful default in making the payments of the out-standing dues. I am, therefore, of the opinion that Sh. Rajesh Garg S/o Sh. T.L. Garg & Sh. Sunil S/o Sh. Ram Kishan # 1600, Urban Estate Jind have violated the terms and conditions of allotment letter by not making the payment. Hence, I order the resumption of the residential Plot No. 2767 P Sector 20P-III Sirsa under power conferred upon me under section-17 of the HUDA Act. I also order the forfeiture 10% of the consideration money, interest and penalty etc. out of the amount deposited by them.
Sd/-Estate Officer, HUDA, Sirsa Endst. No. 499-504 Dated: 16/2/18"
8. The resumption orders were challenged by the appellant(s)before the High Court by filing of writ petitions on various grounds. Appellant(s) argued before the High Court that they had no knowledge about the passing of the resumption orders and that they came to know of them only when they sought to deposit the balance payments. The appellants case was that the 4 respondent(s)-authorities have not communicated these orders. They have also submitted that they have already deposited considerable amount and were desirous to make full payments, however, owing to circumstances beyond their control they could not comply in full measure.
9. The High Court, by the order impugned before us dismissed the writ petitions. The only reason given by the High Court is as under:
"21. While considering the facts and circumstances of the other two petitions, we have observed that the petitioner No. 1 has also purchased two more plots in the same sector and got the re-allotment done in short span of time. One plot was joint with petitioner No. 2. Both the said plots were also resumed on account of non-payment of the installments, vide resumption order dated 13.02.2018 and 16.02.2018, respectively. The appeals against the orders of resumption were allowed but the resumption orders were upheld in the revision in both the said cases. Though there are mitigating facts, which have been noted above while considering the facts of CWP-24360-2022 that there were medical conditions in the family of petitioner No. 1 and the father of petitioner No. 2 had already expired at the time when resumption order was passed and there was no indication that the requisite notices under Section 17 of the Act was served upon the petitioners. But keeping in view the fact that 03 plots of the same size were purchased by Rajesh Garg, petitioner No. 1, out of which 02 plots were jointly purchased with Ashwani Mittal, petitioner No. 2, that too in the same sector gives an indication that the petitioners were trying to do hoarding by way of purchasing such plots. As such, the mitigating factors cannot be made as a ground for allowing the other two civil writ petitions, as it would amount to unnecessary enrichment of the hoarders, who had not paid up the installments on time."
(emphasis supplied)
10. It is evident from the above that, while the resumption orders 5 refers to a default in making necessary payment(s), the High Court while holding that there are in fact mitigating factors for non- payment within time, proceeded to dismiss the writ petitions on the ground that the appellant(s) seems to be hoarding / having additional plots.
11. Heard Mr. Manoj Swarup, learned senior counsel for the appellants and Mr. Akshay Amritanshu, learned counsel for the State of Haryana. It is nobody’s case, much less of the State while passing the resumption orders that the appellants were “trying to do hoarding by way of purchasing such plots” when the alleged hoarding or having multiple plots has never been the case of the authorities. It is impermissible for the High Court to imagine a new ground and dismiss the Writ Petition(s), particularly when the High Court has specifically observed that “Though there are mitigating facts, which have been noted above while considering the facts of CWP-24360-2022 that there were medical conditions in the family of petitioner No. 1 and the father of petitioner No. 2 had already expired at the time when resumption order was passed and there was no indication that the requisite notices under Section 17 of the Act was served upon the petitioners.”
12. In view of the above, the judgment and order passed by the High Court cannot be sustained. Writ petitions being CWP No. 12376 of 2022 and CWP No. 12129 of 2022 stand allowed.
13. While we have allowed the writ petitions, and quashed the resumption orders, we clarify that the respondents will be entitled to notice the appellants to pay the balance amount within a period of four weeks from the date of the receipt of the notice. 6
14. With these directions the appeals stand disposed of. No order as to costs.
…………………………………………………………………………J. [PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA] …………………………………………………………………………J. [MANOJ MISRA] NEW DELHI;
JANUARY 22, 2025
7
ITEM NO.32 COURT NO.12 SECTION IV-B
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 34812/2024 [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07-08-2023 in CWP No. 24360/2022 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh] STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS RAJESH GARG & ANR. Respondent(s) IA No.194175/2024-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING WITH Diary No(s). 1604/2024 (IV-B) IA No. 15926/2024 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 15924/2024 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES Date : 22-01-2025 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Sr. A.A.G. Mr. B.k. Satija, A.A.G. Mr. Akshay Amritanshu, AOR Ms. Himanshi Shakya, Adv.
Mr. Nikunj Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Drishti Saraf, Adv.
Ms. Pragya Upadhyay, Adv.
Ms. Aakanksha, Adv.
Mr. Ankit Swarup, AOR Mr. Manoj Swarup, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Neelmani Pant, Adv.
Mr. Hamad Tariq, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :Mr. Kaveesh Nair, Adv.
Mr. Lakshmi Kant Srivastava, Adv.
Ms. Manisha Ambwani, AOR Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Sr. A.A.G. Mr. B.k. Satija, A.A.G. Mr. Akshay Amritanshu, AOR Ms. Himanshi Shakya, Adv.
8 Mr. Nikunj Gupta, Adv.
Ms. Drishti Saraf, Adv.
Ms. Pragya Upadhyay, Adv.
Ms. Aakanksha, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL)......@ Diary No(s). 34812/2024
1. Delay condoned.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
3. We are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court. Hence, the Special Leave Petition is dismissed.
4. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Civil Appeal No. ......@ SLP (C) No. @Diary No(s). 1604/2024
5. Delay condoned.
6. Leave granted.
7. The Civil Appeals stand disposed of in terms of the Signed Order.
8. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(KAPIL TANDON) (NIDHI WASON) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH) (Signed Order in Civil Appeal No. ......@ SLP (C) No. @Diary
No(s). 1604/2024 is placed on the file) 9