C.W.P. No. 2098 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 2098 of 2010 Date of Decision:- 08.12.2011 M/s Khukhrain Brothers and another .....petitionerss Versus Chandigarh Administration and others .....Respondents CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH Present:- Mr. S. K. Jain, Advocate for the petitionerss. Mr. Amar Vivek, Advocate for the respondents. **** SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J(Oral). In the year 1974 the petitioners were allotted SCF No. 37, Sector 26, Chandigarh, on lease hold basis. On 12.5.2003 the said allotment was cancelled due to misuse of the site by the petitioners and after imposing forfeiture of 10% of the total amount of consideration money, interest and other dues. Though the appeal filed by the petitioners against the said order was dismissed, however, on revision filed by them the cancellation order was set aside, while passing the following order:- “5.After hearing the parties and going through the inspection report, I find that presently no misuse is existing at the site. I, therefore, set aside the impugned order, restore the site to the owner subject to the condition that the forfeiture, if any, is to be paid within one week from the dispatch of the order, failing which C.W.P. No. 2098 of 2010 2 the order of the Estate Officer shall become operative.” The petitioners could not deposit the amount of forfeiture within the time prescribed in the aforesaid order as the tenant has also filed writ petition and there was an understanding that the tenant will deposit the said amount which he never deposited. The petitioners filed an application before respondent No. 1 for grant of extension of time limit for depositing the said amount. Vide impugned order dated 11.1.2010 (Annexure P-6), the application was dismissed taking it as the review petition. The said order has been challenged in the present writ petition. Admittedly, the amount of forfeiture was only Rs. 7500/-. It is also admitted position that the said amount was deposited on 25.11.2009 after delay of 18 months. On 3.8.2010, counsel for the petitioners made a statement that petitioners are ready and willing to pay 25% penal interest on the delayed payment. On the said statement made by the petitioners, the case was adjourned to enable the counsel for the respondents to have instructions in this regard. Today counsel for the respondents states that the department is ready to accept the offer made by the petitioners. In view of the said stand taken by the respondents, the petitioners undertake to deposit 25% of the penal interest on the delayed payment of Rs.7500/- within a period of one month from today. In view of the said undertaking given by the petitioners and the stand taken by the respondents, the writ petition is disposed of and the impugned order for rejecting the prayer for extending the time for depositing the said amount is hereby set aside and consequently the orders dated 12.5.2003 Annexure P-1, C.W.P. No. 2098 of 2010 3 dated 28.6.2007 Annexure P-2, dated 24.4.2008 Annexure P-3 and dated 11.1.2010 Annexure P-6 are hereby set aside. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE 08.12.2011 ( PARAMJEET SINGH ) reema JUDGE