IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P NO. 2272 OF 2009 DECIDED ON : 12.02.2009 Sat Prakash and another ...Petitioners versus Adviser to the Administrator and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT Present : Mr. Aashish Chopra, Advocate, for the petitioners. SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) In this civil writ petition, the petitioners have two fold grievances. Firstly, they seek quashing of the order dated 19.11.2008 (Annexure P-12) whereby the recovery of misuse charges from them in respect of S.C.O No. 83, Sector-46, Chandigarh, has been upheld by the Appellate Authority. Their second grievance is that even as per the report of the authorized officer of the U.T Administration (Annexure P-7), misuser of the premises stood stopped in October, 2007, yet they have been compelled to pay the misuse charges till May, 2008. The excess amount of misuse charges recovered from the petitioners is allegedly not being refunded to them despite representation dated 19.01.2009 (Annexure P-13). C.W.P NO. 2272 OF 2009 -2- It is also the petitioners' grievance that in view of Rule 20-A of the Chandigarh Lease Hold of Sites and Building Rules, 1973, these charges were recoverable from the tenants (lessees) and not from the petitioners who took all possible steps to stop the misuse of their premises at the hands of the tenants. Reference is also made to the notice dated 01.09.2008 (Annexure P-11), which according to the petitioners vindicate their stand and whereby the respondents have called upon the tenants to deposit the misuse charges amounting to Rs.9,24,240/-. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners at some length and on perusal of the documents referred to above, I am of the considered view that the respondents are required to consider the report Annexure P-7 and thereafter, redetermine as to whether or not the lessee/occupier of the premises in question are liable to pay the misuse charges after October, 2007 also. Respondent No.3 is accordingly directed to take cognizance of the petitioners' application dated 19.01.2009 (Annexure P-13) and dispose of the same in accordance with Rules/law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. As regards the petitioners' claim that the misuse charges are recoverable from the tenants in terms of Rule 20-A of 1973 Rules, suffice it to say that since recovery proceedings have already been initiated against the tenants, it is only after C.W.P NO. 2272 OF 2009 -3- effecting the recovery that the petitioners can seek refund of the said charges. Disposed of. FEBRUARY 12, 2009 (SURYA KANT) shalini JUDGE