77 r 71 No1122of2003 t0 other connectedmatters 1 1 CWP Il INTHE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION 61202010 1CWPNo1122 of2003 RakshaRani 1 eeePetitioner VERSUS 1C HSAMB and others e e 0 0 2eCWPNoe20153of2004 I RameshChand CD Petitioner 7 I 9 Z VERSUS HSAMB and others 1 C J 3CWPNo16182 of2009 08 Ashok Kumar QO eeePetitioner 5 Z VERSUS 1 1 Qm others Respondents 4eCWPN0016787of2005 Surinder Kumar Petitioner 1 1 1 1 r VERSUS 1 1 State Agricultural MarketingBoard and otherS 1 1 ee t l 4 1 5CWP N05152 of2007 1 11 Radhika 2014.03.28 14: 47 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document I l t 9 78 Jl 4 CWP No1122 of2000 other connected matters 2 Sarla Devi eeePetitioner 1 VERSUS Haryana State AgriculturalMarketingBoard and othrsr eeeRespondents 6CWP N005202 of 2007 Ir ShankuntlaDevi 4eePetitioner Q VERSUS t 0 State AgriculturalMarketingBoard and others 0 e I Cl 7CWP Noe1781 of2008 I Kalicharan and others Petitioners Z m VERSUS State AgriculturalMarketingBoard and others 10 I e e 08 fn 8eCWPNol0142 of2009 Ashwani Kumar and another a Z eeePetitioners VERSUS 1 State AgricuIturalMarketingBoard and others e 9eCWPNol01412009 Jai Parkash i 1 eeePetitioner 4 1 VERSUS Haryana State AgriculturalMarketingBoard and others e44 Respondents 10CWP Nol17 of2010 1 1 1 1 Radhika 2014.03.28 14: 47 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 79 lr CWP No1122 of2003 i other connected matters 1 Balwant Rai eeePetitioner 1 VERSUS Haryana State AgriculturalMarketingBoard and others 1 1 11CWP No18076 of2009 1e PardeepKumar Petitioner 1 VERSUS 0 Haryana State AgriculturalMarketingBoard and others C0 tI J 9 120CWPNo8096 of2009 1 I Tara Rani Petitioner r Z r VERSUS Haryana StatAgriculturalMarketingBoard and others 1 I 08 11 130CWPNo18095 OF 2009 Radha Kishan and another 3 Z eePetitioners r 1 VERSUS StateofHaryanaand others Respondents S1r 14CWP No14064 of2010 Sunil Kumar Sareen 1 1 etitioner 1 1 VERSUS StateofHaryana and others 4 e e Respondents t Radhika 2014.03.28 14: 47 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document I n 80 CWPNo1122 of2003 O other connected matters 4 CORAM J HONBLEMRJUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI PRESENT MrRaviKapoorAdvocate Mraveen Batd Advocate Markan Advocate Mragat SinghAdvocate for the petitioner MrCB Geol Advocate MrAK JangraAdvocate MrAmit Sharma Advocate 1 r for 0 0 I PermodKohli Je C5 I Z Controversy is common to thesepetitionsPreciselyspeakingthe 1 chlengingthe action of the in charging 1P petitionersare feeinterest and penaltyfrom them for grantingpermisslOn to extensiOO 1 I 08 raise constructionovertheplotsallottedto them in various developed areas Cl1 claimis madefor refund of the in the Stateof HaryanaIn some petitions e7 1 Z alreadydeposited Petitionersin all thesepetitions were interestand Ll allottedplotsby the for differentcommercialpurposes from 1 I I e timeto time Inview ofthe nature ofreliefclaimed it is not necessaiy to advert to factsof each and every case Howeverbrief factual matrix is noticed from l CWPN01122 of2003 1 4eeeee Market Kalka referred to as the by a generalauction notice invited Ie4 4 for allotmentofplotsin the Grain Market to be developed byHaryanaState MarketingBoard namelyKalka Mandi Besides givingthe 1 J Radhika 2014.03.28 14: 47 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 81 Jrlel 1 No1122 of2003 8 other connectedmatters 5 CWP of the area various other facilitiesto be providedin the NeW 1 The relevant extract of the above auctlon Grain Market were notice is here under1 1 developdwith the modern 4C This mandi 1S Proper arrangement in the mandiis beingmadefor wa Cadda shedsPark and Rest HOUSe pucca Latrines Cooler Water electricitysewerage 1 and cattle and for their drmkingwater Work of Q androads have been Facility 0 pucca 0 andpost offlce will also be provided in the 1 of bank I CD mand 39 I was to be madethroughopen auctionThe payment was to 1 Z inaccordancewith thefollowingschedulee bemade 1 e bidamount will haveto be coosited at the 0 3114 ofthe I l I spot 1 45 6 auctionpricein full can be within j CQ from the date of without interest or i one 3 Z the same can be lll three years in 6 1 r i 1 On the balance amount easy 1 1 ofthe instalments interest at the bank rate would be 1 1 1 leviable 73 1 construttthe shop t The was under obligationto 9eewaee 01 It asper thedesignofthe Market Committee within one year for allotment of plot and in the The oetitioner r heldon 1521983 at Kalka Bid of the petitioner was and r auction 5 v 1 the was allottedplotnos 47 and 48 measuring16 x 50 for an 1 1 1 Radhika 2014.03.28 14: 47 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 82 1 CWP N0e1122of2003 other connected matters 6 amountof Rs32000 Earnest money of RsB0001 was adjusted towards the J priceofthe plotThe balance amount ofRs400011eing 750Ioofthe sale 1 was to be depositedeither within 30 da57sof the eceiptof the J without interest or in three instalmentsth interest at the allotment letter 1 rateof7 IzOIoin the followingorderl 1 No of Date of Amount of I Interest Total Remarks insalment talment 1 R80001e Rs501 RsS150 15 2583 2nd 2513 RsS0001 Rs6001 RsS6001 1 1 222 e 3S RsS0001 1Rs300 RsS300 25AS4 r1 6 V W V V e 6 e L 0 0 from the interest leviable on paymentby instalments the 1I 1 CD allotrnent letter also containeda covenant for impositionof penaltyfor I paymentClause 6 relatingto imposition of penay is Z hereunder m tZ For l default 5Io 1 For 2 default 7 WIo 08 For 10 CtO It is that of the allottedplotswas not giventill Weo Z Thepetitioner claims to have made a requestfor handingover the 2001 1 tl vide letter dated 172001 6AnnexureP7 The petitionerwas askedtodepositthe extensionfee beforetaking vide letter dated 692001 4nnexure It was also indicatedthatthpetitionerhas failed to petitionerplaced constructthe shop Th on recordsome letterswherebY 1 1 C of Executive Offlcerln j j 1 requestwas niade for Secretar Committeevide its lettersdated1572002 Pe 14 and Pel5 asked the petitioner to depositextenslOO fee of Rsl521001 1 for each plot before extension forconstruction of the shopis grantedTh 1 however for waivingoff the extension fee vide letter Radhika 2014.03.28 14: 47 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 83 r 1 L 1 CWPNo1122 of2003 other connected matters 7 1 dated3172000 Pe169In the year 2000 HaryanaGovernment framed Haryana StateAgriculturalMarketingBoard Sale of Immovable Rules 2000 referred to aS the 2000 Rule9Rule 40fthe aforesaidRule relatestosale by allotmentand sub rule 1 51 provides the mode for paymentThe mode of is as underl XXX XXX XXX XXX m balance seventyflve percentof the priceof plot C either be without interest within thirty I e 0 0 from the date of issue of ailotment letter or ln Slx I C instalmentswith fifleen percentinterest or at of interest as may be specifled by the Board 4r such rate Z time to time The first such instalmentshallfall due 1 from C a8er six from the date of allotment letter I interest on instalmentsshallaccrue from the 08 iiateofoffer ofpossession 19 r 1 Rule further deals with the which Rule 50f the r 1 4 Z reads as under Om 5The of the plot shall be offered to the allotteeby the Executive Market Committeewithin thirtydays frorn the date of issue of allotmeht letter If minimum basic facility 1 roads eM 1 water supplyelectrificationare and if the said basic facilities arenot then alr providingthe saidbasic facilities se9 4 1 Radhika 2014.03.28 14: 47 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 4 r5r40r re er ee GEr0Ewme e741a 91Vn901emPWmPW e 84 d J 1 CWP No1122 of2003 Sc other connected matters 8 1 Sub Rule 59of Rule 4 and Rule 50f the 2000 Rule was amended 1 videnotification dated52002 as underl In rule 4 and in sub rule 51 the words and signs However interest on instalmentsshall accrue from the dateofoffer ofpossessionshall be added at the end 1 Rule5 atler the words allotment letter the words In letters andsigns if minimum basic facilities e rod j sewerage and electrificattonare exlStlng if the said basic facilities are not after and 0 0 the said basic facilities shall be added at the tD end 55 r The placedon record certificate dated712004 Z that the constructionwas on 30122003 64nnexure P 10 a2 2190 communication dated 26112009 hasloeen flled as Annexure I P31which indicates that water supplyin grainmarket has started since 08 2612007 The petitioner has placedon record to establish ClO the amenities in the area have not been provided even till 7 that Z 2009 1e Ll the contrary the in their replyhave pleaded that the To basic such as platforms streets electricity water supplyroadsand offlce buildingetc have been in the Grain Market It is further 1 conducted the same market on statedthat second auctionsofPlot was ln emvs 30111990and 24 out of 25 plotswere sold It is accordinglypleaded that thisestablishes of certain facilities even in the year 1990 It is 1 the case ofle that the petitionerwas not intefested in of the shopsThat is whythepetitionerwaited for 20 years to construction I r Radhika 2014.03.28 14: 47 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 10 85 5 41 1 of2003 other connectedmatters 9 CWP It is also stated that the petitionerseems a to have raise 1 theplotfor resale also statedthatthepetitioner did 1 notpay the instalmentsafter litial paymentof earnest money and it was againstPlot 1 was only ln April1989 that a sum of Rs25001 plotNoA8 A notice dated95 1988 was NoA7and Rs300001against served upon the this the did not start andthus the pleathat W not handedover tillAugust 2001 is not well founded possessionwas 1 made by the petitionerit has been Givingdetails of the 0 0 was paidby the 1 mentionedthat hebalance amount of priceOf th PO I J 211 1987 for Plot NoA7 and between C5 petitionerbetween201 1986 tO I for Plot NoA8 have alsopleaded that 181986 to Z in the year 1984 but she did not possessionwasofferedto the have relied upon the policydecision dated C2 take possessiolle e taken to chargeextensionfee in all cases I 2141998wherebydecision was 08 periodfor constructionofshopslapsed on l 01987 where two 11 the pendencyof the petitionandin view of the conflicting 1 3 Z of facilities this Court vide its standsof the parties 1 r LocalCommissionto inspectthe site ln orderdated182003 a KalkaMandi The after spot submittedhis report dated22003 The reported that the development ofthe area 1 1 andvery few shopshave been constructedThe 111question is very poor 1 1 1 badcondition Electric Polls roadshave beeli partly constructedand are ln I havebeen installedbuttheelectricityis availableonlyon WednesdayIt is furthermentionedthatthough water tank was constructedhowev thereis 4 no system of water The seweragesysteminstalledis not working f 1 Radhika 2014.03.28 14: 47 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 86 C ie H cwp No1122 of2003 other conneCtedmattrS 10 The area is used for parkingof busesand other vehicles From the placedon record it alsoappears that there are very few constructed Someconstructions are incompleteRoads 1 have not beenproperlyconstructedand even where there is a road it is notl metalled are bushes here and there Electric pollsare 7isible The Trucks busesandcars in a manner on landis uneven plac Someof these were takenin November 2009 vanous 1 with a dal dated camera r replyof he alsodoes not establishthal all the 0 The 0 detailsof facilities given It facilities are lIl poSitlon nor any C canbe safelyand inferredfrom the above mentioned facts that thefacilities haven0tbeen provided as per thegeneralaUcti6nnOtiCeiSSUed Z theyear 1984 Thoughthe have pleaded that as far back as 111 m t 1987however thereis no such recordto C2 was offered in the year Ct I Both the sides have relied upon various supporttheir 08 of this Court and ofthe HonbleApex Court lt may be useful to ClO noticesome ofthe relied upon bythe parties mW3 Z A Division Bench of this Court in the case of PankajSharma and 1 rl othersvse State ofHaryanaand others 200331PLR 790 while relying earlier Division Bench judgmentof this Court titd as Mls Makhan LalDalip Singh etc v HSeAMB CWP N004241of 1992 decided on 5619931held as underl 1 1 1 e1 41n view ofthe aforesaiddiscussionwe allow this writ and direct the to providewater and sewerage facilities and other facilitiesas mentioned111thesanctionedbuildingplanstoall the 1 Radhika 2014.03.28 14: 47 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 1 87 A 1 1 11 CWP of2003 8c other connectedmatters plot holders in the New Grain Market Naneola District 1 within a periodof one yeai It is furtherdirected Ambala that the would not chargeinterest and penal interestfrom the till the water and sewerage 1 themin the New Grain Market facilities are provided to It isalso that the will raise 1 J on the allottedplotsas perthe 1 designwithin a oftwo years from the date of r 0 of thewater and seweragefacilitiesin the New I 0 C GrainMarket However in the meanwhile the 1 m 1 2 petitlonerswillcontinue to pay instalmentsof the price I without interest The clause of interest alreadyflxed C Z afterfacilities of water 1 would come into operation provided to thed pelitioners lll supplyand sewerage are J 1 the new Grain Marketlf the commit any 08 paymentof instalmentsin the default in CQ aforesaidmanner theywill be liable topay interest on 3 Z provided the allotment letter the said default as ln 1 CL have fallen due till today the I Whatever shallpay thesame to the within a of two months lf any new d6fault in the payment 1 VWV of instalmentsis the petitioners would be ol liableto pay interestalso 91 1 AnotherDivision Benchin the case of Mls Fateh SinghJitender of Haryana and others 2000 31P2 also Kumar vs State the earlier Diirision in the case ofMls Makhali 1e Radhika 2014.03.28 14: 47 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 88 1 4 1 r 1 of2003 other connectedmatters 12 CWP supraland other judgmentin the 1 Lal DalipSingh etce ve HeSeAeMeBa Administration 1999 caseof SukhpalSingh Kang Ve 1 1 PLJ219 DBI wherein it has beenheld as underl Theroads Annexures P0 and Pa7 relied upon by 11 Shri Hooda do not in any manner supportthe case set up 1 bythe A careful of the order in Makhan Lal DalipSinghandothersv HaryanaStateand 1 supra9 shows thal petitionersMls Makhan Lal others rl with thepleathat it could DalipSinghhad corne 0 0 due to lack of water and sewerage not start I j connectionsandalso because the electric wires were 113 plotThe counsel for the Ir passlng over the Z seems to have on a e2 to r that it was for the petitioner I constructionbecause of the existenc of electric raise 1i O8 to the of condition wiresover theplot al c bythe court that interest shal l not be charged on the 3 Z The order passedin CWP amount of Om but a reiterationof the Nol0948of 1993 is f in Mls MakhanLal DalipSinghscase direction given supra9The petitioner in our consideredview 1 take age of those orders because aS Pe hS O9 e V 1 showingthe has been and 1 and telephone have been made availableto it m A SingleBench of this Court in the case of Vinod Mittal and others 1 J Radhika 2014.03.28 14: 47 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 89 1 4 1 e1 01 13 CWP of2003 8 other connected matters 1 ofHaryana c Ors 200941RCR Civill 528 considering 1 is State 1 1 1 7 issue in this context and various of HUDA held as 1 underl 4 1161 On a combinedreadingof the relvant 1 of the FA Act and the Regulations 1 prOVlSlOns thatthe basic amenities can be said it transpires Il to have been when the metaledroad 1 water sewerage and e1eCtri6Cat0 1S t and madeavailableto the allottees The widerexpression whlch includes 1 nenit ls a activitieslike thetourist spots open space parks 1 and play elds etc Thoughthe expression 1 developmentwork has not been de6nedunder ethe HUDA Act or the Regulationshowever or 0 the limitedpurpose of enablingan allottee to 0 utilize the allottedsite it would includethe basic t I amenitiesonlyand not the amenitieswhich are to C5 be provided for the entire township and need not Il be conSned to one urban area only The I thusunder legal are a obligationto the basic amenities and 1 Z the works before the 1 is offered a 1 I e 1171 Similarlythe Iiabilityof an allottee to pay I 1 inreston the balanceallotment priceshall accrue from thedateof offer of only which in 5 be offered only on of turn can OQ works It means that r 1 unlessthe works consistingof basic w the Z amenities are 1 authoritiescannot charge interestfronthe allpttee raised on behalf of the 1 The Om that the of work basicamenitiesis not a bilaterally compnsing agreed for charging interest8om the aottee is thus totally 8nd merits ejection In view of the above referred provisions 1 imposing statutory upon the e the laid down by the Honble Court in a recent decision in 1 Administration v Amarjeet UeTe Singh 8 Orse SCC 660 also do n come to therescue of the The HUDA is a authorityconstituted to act as an hand of the welfare State It has tpact strictlylIl with its own Regulations Since the local commissionerhas found as a matter of fact that the development works comprisingthe 1 Radhika 2014.03.28 14: 47 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 90 990 1 O7 14 V1 of2003 Sc other connectedmatters V CWP basic amenltles were in June 1992 1 have no hesitationin holdingthat the petltlO liable topayinterest witheffect from l 61992 are onwards and not priorthereto 31 t LearnedSingle Judgein another case ofPawan Kumar vse State of and another CWP of2008 decidedon 1252009 while of the Market Comittee observedas the rightsof the undec ln this view ofthe matter there can be no escapebut to 1 0 m C holdthat the petitioner defaultedin paymentof 0 due installmentsas perthe agreedSchedule the 0 I have held it liable to pay penaland C interest as per theagreed termsand conditions I 1 1r for the refund thereof of the allotment and no Z canbe issued rL wEitpetitionis of accordingly 1 Ct The r AnotherSingle of this Court in a bunch of writ tled 08 1 oo asBir SinghNain c 3 CWP N0012018of 2008 and Z Board HaryanaPanchkulaand others ll The stand of the Board that basic amenities were J provided at thetilne of allotment is by the allotteesUnder the wrlt peti tion this Court Will nOt 6 1 1 thisissue Since the matter has alreadybeen decidedby a Judgeof this Court relyingupon in Mls Investments Case supra 1 s have rightlypaidthepenallllterest1herefore petitioners are not entitled to any refund for making 1 Radhika 2014.03.28 14: 47 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 91 e 4a e II CWP No1122 of2003 Sc other connected matters 15 of extensionfee and penalinterest While similar issue Honble SupremeCourt in the case of UT ChandigarhAdministration c Anre Vse AmarjeetSingh8 Ors 1 JT 2009 41 SC 39 relied upon its earlier judgmentin the case of CorporationChandigarhv ShantikulljInirestments Pvte Ltd 2006 41SCC 109 and various other and observed as j under 1 183 As per the terms of allotment upon r of the 25 per cent will be handedover and rest of the 75 per cent of the 0 leasedainount to bepaidin astaggered manner ie C0 in threeannual equatedinstallments along With I interest at the rate of 10 per cent If someone wants CD to the whole of the 75 per ct of the amount he can do so In that case he will not be required to pay anyinterest But if a partywants to 1 1 makepaymentwithin a periodof threeyearsthen 1 Z he is under the obligationto pay 10 per cent 1 intrest oll the alnount of installm6ntThis is the 0 obligationon the part of tallottee as per the conditionof lease and he cannot get out ofit by I sayingthat the basic amenities have not been C6 for enjoyingthe allotted Iand therefore 1 OQ he is not liable to pay the interest We askedthe learned counsel for the parties to tell Z US whichis theobligation ofthe lessor in the lease deedwhich says that theywiU not chargeinterest Qm on theinstallinentsbeforeprovidingthe amenities There is neitherany condition in the lease nor any under the auction If the parties have given theirbids anbwiththeir eyes wide open they L have to blame themselve It cannot be enforced J by any mandainus as there is no obligation contained 111 the 1e8sedeed or in the auctiot 1 notice ll 1 r Therefore it 1S evidentthat a lesseelsuccessful bidder cannot seek of the instalments of premium or of accrual of the interestpayable as per rules 11 I 9 20We are ot in a positlon to acceptthe submission of Shri Bhandarethat equitywould not demandchargingof lnterest e4Ien thoughthe plots 1 Radhika 2014.03.28 14: 47 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document kS 14 92 1 1 r CWP No1122 of2003 O other connected matters 16 are yetto be fully developedWhen partiesenter into contract theyare to abide by the terms and conditions of the same unless the same be 1 In the present questionof equity case does not really arise inasmuch s the condition relatingto interest 1S founded on a statutoryrule viresofwhich hasnot beenchallenged Il 1 J 24 But the facts of this case are completely different The auction sale was in December 1996 The National Commission has fecorded a Onding thatalmost all the facilitieslamenitieshad provided In the year 1999 that is within about two years Thereforethe observationsofthis court in para38 1 of will have no to these 0 1r as theywere madein the context cases 1 0 of a writ proceedingwhereas we are concemed 0 with a under Consumer Protection Act We may also refer to anotheraspect Section 7 of the Act empowersthe Central Goveent to 1 9 Ievysuch fees and taxes as it may consider Il 1 necessary 6whichshall be in addition to any fee or tax for the timebeingleviable under any other lau 1 Z lIl respectof any Slte or buildingon the transferee or the occupierthereof for the purpose of providinglnaintaining or continuingany amenity 0 at This provisionlearlydemonstrates that the providingamenities not linked to 1 1 e auction of plotson lease basis and the premiuin r 08 paidlSnot for providingany amenityThe Central Cll Governmentis requiredto provideamenities by 1 levyingfees and respectof siteslplots taxes in on 10 em the transfereesloccupiers thereof Therefore it 1S Z doubtful whether any reduction in interestcould be made on the ground 0 of nonprovision of amenitie5 Be that as it may As we have alreadyheld that para 38 will not applywe do not propose examine that aspectany furtherin thesecases 95 1 Even thoughDivision Bench of this Court in the case of Pankaj 4P Sharmaand others supralruled that liabilityto pay interest and penalty I I 1 accrues on of facilities However a Division Bench lll the case of MJs Fateh SinghJitender Kumar lpral had expressed a differentopinionregarding the liabilityto pay interestand penalioterest111 the event of default The controversyhas been now settled at rest by Radhika 2014.03.28 14: 47 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:29 I attest to the accuracy and integrity