IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 22339 of 2010 Date of Decision: 15.12.2010. M/s Sethi Industrial Corporation --Petitioner Versus H.U.D.A & another --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. Rohit Ahuja, Advocate for the petitioner. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) Notice of motion. Mr. Siddharth Batra, Advocate present in the Court has been asked to accept notice on behalf of respondents. Keeping in view the nature of relief claimed and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is being disposed of at the motion stage itself. The petitioner was owner in possession of an industrial plot situated within the revenue estate of village Mewla Maharajpur, District Faridabad, now Sector 31, Faridabad. The land is being utilized for industrial purpose. The petitioner has established an industry. In the year 1976 vide letter dated 6.12.1976 the Govt. levied development/cess charges @ Rs. 10/- per sq. yard. The petitioner had purchased this land measuring 21 kanals 14 marlas and was asked to pay the development charges. It appears that on the basis of some negotiations the amount of development/cess was required to be paid in installments. Respondents revised the development charges from Rs. 10/- to Rs. 62/- per sq. yard vide letter dated 14.11.1986 (P-3) and raised a demand of Rs. 8,79,570/-. The CWP. No. 22339 of 2010 -2- development charges were further enhanced to Rs. 200/- per sq. yard vide letter dated 14.10.2002 (Annexure P-11) and Circular dated 8.7.2002 (Annexure P-13) and further a demand of Rs. 33,96,500/- has been raised. Some of the similarly situated persons approached this Court through CWP No. 3219 of 2007 which came to be decided vide judgement dated 30.9.2008. The aforesaid judgement was finally affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.L.P. The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 15.9.2009 dismissed the S.L.P. The petitioner made representations dated 9.12.2002 (Annexure P-12) and 2.9.2006 (Annexure P-14/B)seeking refund of the amount which was paid in pursuance to the demand by the respondents. Receiving no response, this petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents for refund of the amount in view of the dictum of the above judgement of this Court affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would be satisfied, if, respondents are directed to take decision on the representations made by the petitioner in the light of the judgements referred to above. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the Administrator, H.U.D.A, Faridabad to decide the representations of the petitioner in the light of the above referred judgements, within a period of three months from the date certified copy of this order is served upon the said respondent. Needless to say that in the event the claim of the petitioner is to be rejected, the same shall be by a reasoned and speaking order. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 15.12.2010. lucky