IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.19458 of 2010 Date of Decision : October 29, 2010. Surinder Singh .....Petitioner versus The State of Punjab and another .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Gagandeep Singh Sirphikhi, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) In compliance to the directions earlier issued by this Court vide order dated 1.4.2009 passed in Civil Writ Petition No.5248 of 2009, respondent Nos.2 vide its impugned communication dated 15.9.2010 (Annexure P-18) has informed the petitioner that he is liable to pay an amount of Rs.3,26,721/- till 13.9.2010 which includes 12% simple interest . The Improvement Trust, Batala has further informed that till this amount is deposited the simple interest @ 12% shall be charged from 14.9.2010. The details of the dues have also been furnished to the petitioner. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the considered view that no case to interfere with the impugned C.W.P.No .19458 of 2010 2 communication, by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction, is made out. Suffice it to observe that if the petitioner has a grievance against the alleged wrong calculations of the dues and/or non-crediting of the amount deposited by him, he may make a representation pointing out such clerical/arithmetic error to the respondent-Improvement Trust who shall then consider the same in accordance with law. However, submission of such a representation shall not absolve the petitioner from the payment of the amount mentioned in the notice dated 15.9.2010 (Annexure P-18). With the liberty aforesaid, the writ petition is disposed of. Dasti. October 29, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE