84 11 4 CWP No17154 of2009 8 otherconnectcdmalters d7 0 IN THE HON13LE HIGH COURT OF PtJNA13 AND ITARYANA AT CHANDIGARII 1 DATE OI DICISION 10 92010 1CWPNo171540f2009 m Shiv SaranKashyap t0 0 ctitioner 0 Vcrsus D The StateofHaryana and othcrs 2CWPNo17171 of2009 Z RajKumar 1 etilioner t Versus cS The StateofHaryana and others 3CWPNo17181 of2009 wmm Z AnguriDevi 0 Llm Pctitioncr Ieel Versus The StateofHaryana and others 94 1 QORAM HONBLE MReRJSTICEPERMOD KOHLI Present Mrshok Malik Advocatcfor pctitioncrs 0 Uma 2014.04.22 10: 38 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 85 16 4 No17154 of2009 other connectedmattcrs 2 CWP MreSSPattarSre DAG Haryana MrAlCKansal Advocale for HUDA PERMODKOIILI Je 0 In all the threewrit petitionsorders dated 1282009 are under challenge there are separate ordersof the even date the basis for these orders is common These petitions are 1 ofbythis commonorder 1 0 Booths were allottedin the IOistrict ShoppingCentre Urban Estate JindHaryanavide allotmentIettersdated3111991 on the D basis of open auctlOIle The cosls of the plolsare differentin drent 4 caSeS The petitioners deposited1010 earnestmoney at the time of Z Under theterms andconditionsofthe 150Ioofthe tX considerationamount was to be within 30 daysfrom the issue of the allotmentlctter It statcdthat 15Io of thc amount was 1S 025 within theprescribed timc Ilowevcr thc entircbalanceamount could not be deposited by thepetitioners in terms of theallotmentlcttcr lt the petitioners visited thc Offlce of the Estatc Ofcer IiUDA in the year Qe 2006 and theycameto know thatthc plotshavc bcen resumcd In CWP No 17171 of 2009 plotwas resumed on 1322001 The petitioners preferred appealsagainstthe ordcrs of before no3 The 0 appeals flled bythepetitioncrs againstthe eepane orderscame to be acceptedPetitioners were asked to depositall pendingdues with interest penaltyetc within one monthalongwlth llne of Rs000 within 1 Uma 2014.04.22 10: 38 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document m861 0 CWP No17154 of2009 0 otherconnectedmatters 3 15 daysfrom the intimation by the Estate OOOcer HUIOA The petitioners were informedof the amount due by the Estatc Officer HUIOA in writing andhad asked the petitioncrs to dcposittheamountwithin 15 daysItis 1 accepted case of the partiesthat thc pctitionersdcpositedthe amount alongwithinterest and penaltyetc within the prescribedtime Aer accepting the amount from thc petitionerthe Estate Offlcer HUDA Jind Oled revision petitionbcforc the Iinancial Commissioner and 1 rJ4 PrincipalSecretary to Governmentof Haryanawn anbCount Planng 0 challenging the orders of the Adlninistrator HUIOA passed 1I1 appealsThe revisional authority has allowed the revisions and set asidethe orderspassedbythe appellate authority onlyon the groundof limitation It has been observed that the appealshavebeer llled aRer abnormally a lo Z periodofsix years from the date and thus appeals havebeen t held to bebarredbytime Rcvision Petltionshavc been acceptedOrdersof cI the havcbeen lIl thesewrit petitions One of the contentions of thc petitioncrs lS that the order of 0 mw resumptlollwas exoarte order No notice was scrved upon the petitioners Z 0a as requiredunder law lt is arguedthat the Estate Officer should have resortedto substitutedSCrVlCC prescribcd in a Clause 30f Scction42 ii of the HUDA Act 1977and Slnce thc ordcrshavc been passcdatthe the petitioners the order of was violativeof the of 94 It is accordingly contendedthat the appellate 1S Justifledin accepting the appcalshe PetltiOncrs havealso statedthatthe periodof limitationcommences frOmthe dateof the present 111 0 Uma 2014.04.22 10: 38 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWPNo17154 of2009 other connectedmauers 4 87 caseand not fromthe date of passingof the resuinption order and thus appeals were withintime One of the contentionsof the petitioners is therewas absolutclyno dcvelopmenteven roads Were nt constructed nor delivered to thc pctitioners Ilence thcywere undcr no to depositthe entire amount duringthe prescribcd time The petitioners have placed on record showingtha1e arca ls water logged thereis absolutely no though somc structures are existing m 1 In the replyflled bythe thc allcgations are denied It 0 4 statedthat the in the area was on 1581998 Off of was also made lIl the year 1998 and Ietterswere sent to D petitionersthroughregisteredposts have also placed 0 record copy ofthe dispatchregistercontaining tbe entriesofdispatch 2 letters It is furtherstatedthatnoticesunder Section 17 176391749 4 issued but the petitioners did not respondforcingthe to the order c5 1 It is contcnded on bchalfofthe pctitioners that thc pctitioners vam compliedwith thc directionsof the appellate authorityby Z 11 amount it was not open lo the Estate Offlccr to havc filcd the petitionA Division Bench of this Court in thc case of Ajay Singh VSe State of Haryanaand others 2009 RCR iviIl 474 C the question of of ploton defaultin payment instalments observedasunderl l l It hasbeen held bythe Courts the power of of Uma 2014.04.22 10: 38 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 88 0 1 44 CWPNo17154 of2009 8 otherconnectedmatters 1 5 houses commercialeand industrial sites etc should be exercised onlyas a last resort A Full this Court in thc case of Ram Puri ve Chief Commissioner Chandigarh AIR 1981 1H 301 has categorically laid down that the power of resumptlon1S ultimate civil sanction and must therefore be used as a weaBn of last reso 1 Inevitablyit shouldbc uscd with grcatcaution and 0 bccausc in a sense the individualistic propertyrightshavc to glve way to D largerpublicpurpose of planncdand urbanisation6Sceparas 86 87 of the Z S The view takenbythe Full I3enchofthis Court lIl r Ram Puris case supra has been approvedby c2j Honble the Supreme Coun in the case of Teri 0 Oat Estates P Ltde va UeTeChandigarh004 em Z 2 SCC 130 Honble thc Supreme Court discussed tl the doctrine of lIl its historical paras 40 lo 53 and referred10 varlous facetsof thc doctrine It 4 has been held that the Court has to see that the and thc administrativc malntaln a proper balancebetweenthe adverse effects which the legislation0 orlhc administrative 1 Uma 2014.04.22 10: 38 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Il 89 Il CWPNo17154 of2009 82otherconnectedmatlers 1 6 ordermay have on the rightsliberlies or interests of persons keepingin mind 6c purpose which they were intendedto serve It also been concluded that cvery casc has to be examined on its own facts 55 In the case of Mls Teri OatEstates Pl tdeVse UTe Chandigah and others SCC 130 Honble SupremeCourt further held that m the drastic power of resumption 1Sto bc uscd only as a l ast resort in a 0 rarest case wherethe allotteehasno intentionat all to pay To the contrary leamed counsel for has refened to a 0 judgment of the Honblc Supreme Court in the casc of HaryanaUrban Authority and Another vs Roochira Ceramics and Z another wherein it has been held that HighCourt can onlyexaminethe 0 4 procedureof correctness It 1S accordinglyarguedon behalf of the 1 that the revisional authorityhavingpassedthc order ltlS not c2 openfor this Court to examlne the validityof the ordcr of the revisional W authority Z I have hcard learncd counsel for thc partiesIt is now a settled Om proposition of law thatthe power of shouldbothelast resort and shouldberesortedto onlyin case of an allottceis unwilling to pay or unable to pay The petitioners had 25Io of the amount within the t stipulatedperiodthoughthe balance could not be paid within the prescribed tune The appealsflled by the petitioners the ordersbf cameto be accepted bytheappcllateauthoritywho is none else 0 Uma 2014.04.22 10: 38 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 0 90 31 CWPNo17154 of2009 ceotherconnectedmatterS 7 thanthe Administrator HUIOA The appellateauthorityon consideration respectivecontentions of the partiesdirected thc pctitionerslppellants therein to pay the amount within a periodof 15 daysalongwithlnterest The Estate Offlcer implcmcnted the order of thc AppcllatcAuthorityand issuedwritten communicationto the to depositthe amountwithin 15 daysIt is admittedcase of thc thepetitioners deposited the amount worked out bythe Estatc Officcr within the r time of 15 daysfrom the date of receiptof thc mcmo for depositof the 0 amount It is onlyafter the amount was receivedbythe I3stateOfflcer that he filed revision petitionbefore the revisional authorityand appeals were flled beyondthe timc The action of the Estate Officer I4UDA 1S totally illegal and unwarranted After having Z the order ofthe AppellateAuthorityand receiving the amount t from thepetitioners 1t was not open to the I1stateOfllcero havechallenged theorder of the appellate byinvoking rcvisional jurisdictionBy 021 the amount payable to the pclitioners and accepting the m amount the EstateOfflccr in fact acquiesccd 10 thc rightof thc Z and estoppedhimself from 11 thc orders of the Appellae AuthorityRevisionalauthority hastotallyignorcdthis aspcctof the matter In additionto this the RevisionalAuthorlty hassimplyallowed therevision petition on the groundthat the appeal was barrcdbytime lt did not record t anyflndingonthe meritsofthe controversy1 am ofthe consideredopinion that the ordersofrevisionalauthority 0 lmpugnedin thesepetitionsare liable to be set aside firstlybecause the revlSlOll Was not competentafterthe 1 Uma 2014.04.22 10: 38 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 1 CWP No17154 of2009 8 otherconnectedmatters ofthe judgmentofthe appellateauthorit9and secondly the resumptionbeingthe last resort at least one opportunityto depositthe outstanding amount was to be providedto thepetitioncrswhich opportunity was providedby the appellateauthorityThc petitioncrsdepositedthe entire outstanding amount alongwith interest iind penaltyThc amount vls accepted bythe Estate Offlcer without any rcscrvationor ridcr These wnt petitlons are accordinglyallowed Orders dated r 1282009 passedby the revisional authorityimpugned ltl thesepetitions 0 are herebyset aside shall hand over the possessionof the 0 booths to the petitioners within a periodof one month from the date a D certifledcopy ofthis order is receivedbythe compctentauthority Copyofthis order bc placedon record ofeach concernedfile Z 2 1 c e1 102010 Pcrmod KohIil 025 4 IVIFK Judge W NOTE2Whether to be referred to the RcporterornotlYES mm Z Clm 0 QvYl4 1 0 Uma 2014.04.22 10: 38 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh Sahil Soni 2016.03.21 12:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document