IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.5121 of 1993 Date of decision: April 27, 2009. Mangat Ram & Ors. ...Petitioner(s) v. State of Punjab & 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 G.C. Dhuriwala, Advocate, for the petitioners. Shri G.S. Attariwala, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - This order shall dispose of CWP No.5121, 5122, 5721, 6595, 6596, 6597, 10982 and 15830 of 1993 as common questions of law and facts are involved in these cases. The petitioners are the allottees/re-allottees of plots in different Mandi Townships of Punjab State. The dates of auction or the allotments are also different. The common question of law and facts sought to be projected in these cases pertain to the inaction of the respondent-authorities in carrying out the development works in the new Grain Markets/Mandi Townships at Rajpura, Faridkot, Jaito and Dirba. The petitioners also seek a direction to the respondents to postpone the payment of due installments and in any case not to charge interest from them till the development works are completed. The Punjab State Agricultural Marketing Board as well as the Administrator, New Mandi Townships have filed their respective written statements. A categoric plea has been taken that completion of the development works is not a pre-condition in terms of the allotment letter or otherwise, for payment of the due installments along with interest. In other words, the respondents have clarified that the interest is being charged on the balance allotment price of the plots which the petitioners could have paid within 30 days of the issuance of the allotment letters without any interest. The respondents have also taken the plea that “the development works and other facilities have already been provided to the petitioners”. Having heard Learned Counsel for the parties at some length and on perusal of the record, I find that the issues raised in these writ petitions stand effectively answered vide order dated 17.3.2009 passed in CWP no.689 of 1991 (RakeshKumar v. State of Punjab & Ors.). These writ petitions are accordingly disposed of in the same terms. April 27, 2009. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge