IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7019 of 2006 1. Md.Numan Alam 2. Md. Lukman Alam Both sons of Md. Moinuddin, resident of custom Road, Bengal Auto Enterprises, Raxaul, P.S.-Town Raxaul, District-East Champaran. ….Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar through its Director Panchayati Raj, New Secretariat, Bihar, Patna. 2. Zila Parishad, Motihari, District-East Champran. 3. Deputy Development Commissioner-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Motihari, District-East Champaran. …..Respondents. ---------------------------------- 3. 01.12.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the Zila Parishad, East Champaran as well as learned counsel for the State. The writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondent Zila Parishad to refund the amount deposited by the petitioners for the construction of shop which was to be given to them by the Zila Parishad alongwith interest. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a sum of Rs. 25,000/- each was deposited by the petitioners for construction of shop by the Zila Parishad in its building at Raxaul on 05.12.1996. It is submitted that when the shop was neither constructed nor possession given, the petitioners were forced to request the Zila Parishad for refund of amount deposited alongwith interest in the year 2006, that is after waiting for about 10 years. A counter affidavit is on record in which it is stated that for various reasons the shops could not be 2 constructed, however, letter was sent to the petitioners to receive their money but they refused to take the same as would be clear from the endorsement made in the letter dated 20.06.2006. This Court feels that the respondent Zila Parishad is at fault both on account of non-construction of the shops for which they took money and also for not ensuring that the money was returned to the petitioners in time. If the shops, for any reason, could not be constructed then it was their duty to offer the money back to the petitioners promptly and they should not have kept sitting on the matter for 10 years waiting for the petitioners to apply for the refund. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition stands disposed off with a direction to the respondents No. 2 and 3 to refund the money deposited by the petitioners alongwith interest @ 12 % from the date of deposit of such money till 22.06.2006, that is, the date when they refused to take the said refund. Let, the amount be paid within one month from the date of production/receipt of a copy of this order upon the concerned respondents. Failure to pay the amount within the stipulated time would entitle the petitioners to 12% simple interest from the time it was due till the time such payment is made. Saif/- (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)