CWP No. 16583 of 2008 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 16583 of 2008 Date of decision: February 16, 2009. Umkal Hospital Private Limited ...Petitioner(s) v. Haryana Urban Development Authority & Ors. ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Shri Puneet Bali, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Ravi Dutt Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. Shri Sidharath Batra, Advocate for respondent(s) No.1, 3 & 4. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - (Oral): The petitioner was allotted a Nursing Home site, No.NH-5, Sector 45 at Gurgaon in an open auction, vide allotment letter dated 2.3.2004. As per the terms and conditions of the allotment, the petitioner was required to remit a sum of Rs.7,57,500/-, i.e., 15% of the allotment price in order to make it 25% of the total within 30 days from the date of issue of the allotment letter. The petitioner, however, paid Rs.6 lacs only on 16.7.2004 CWP No. 16583 of 2008 -: 2 :- (Annexure P-3). There was, thus, a delay of more than three months in depositing the said amount. The respondents have cancelled the allotment on the ground that the petitioner failed to deposit 25% of the bid price as per the agreed terms and conditions. Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto Learned Counsel for the parties have been heard. The HUDA has framed a policy dated 9.4.1999 (Annexure P- 14), inter-alia, providing condonation of delay in respect of allotment of commercial/residential plots, etc. It appears from the policy that the delay upto 30 days could be condoned by the Chief Administrator, HUDA after levying 5% surcharge on the balance amount. The allottee could be asked to pay penal interest also. The policy further provides that, “the powers of condonation beyond 60 days in cases of hardship is vested with Chairman, HUDA”. It is informed that the Chief Minister, Haryana is the Ex-officio Chairman of HUDA. The power to condone the delay above 30 or 60 days, as the case may be, thus, vests with the Chairman, HUDA to whom, the petitioner does not appear to have represented so far. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that it is a case of extreme hardship as the petitioner is running the clinic from a residential premises and penal action for the unauthorized use of the said residential premises has already been initiated. The petitioner is, therefore, keen to construct the allotted site to shift her nursing home. Having heard Learned Counsel for the parties and considering CWP No. 16583 of 2008 -: 3 :- the mitigating circumstances highlighted on behalf of the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the Chief Administrator, HUDA to treat this writ petition as a representation on behalf of the petitioner for further condonation of delay so as to enable her to seek regularization of the allotment on payment of the surcharge, penal interest and/or penalty, as the case may be, provided that the delay in payment is condoned by the Competent Authority, namely, the Chairman, HUDA. The petitioner's representation be accordingly placed before the said competent authority, as early as possible. Till the decision is taken by the Chairman, HUDA, status quo as it exists today shall be maintained. The order passed by the Chief Administrator, HUDA is rendered redundant. Disposed of. February 16, 2009. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge