1 12 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2912/2006. Harak Chand Malpali & Anr. Vs. State & Anr. Date of Order :: 23rd September 2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI Mr. D.D. Chitlangi for Mr. J.P. Joshi, for the petitioners. Mr. Dron Kaushik, for the respondent No.2. ..... BY THE COURT: Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the controversy as involved in this writ petition stands practically covered by the decision of this Court in a batch of petitions led by S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3419/2005 (Manoj Kumar & Anr. Vs. State & Anr.) decided on 03.03.2008; and that this writ petition may be disposed of in the light of the said order except with necessary modifications about the schedule of payment and execution of work. The controversy had been regarding demand of external development charges by the respondent Urban Improvement Trust, Sriganganagar (UIT) @ Rs. 50/- square metre with reference to the Notifications dated 01.01.2002 and 15.01.2002 as issued by the State Government in its Urban Development Department. The petitioners have challenged such demand as being unauthorised and unjustified. This Court, while deciding the said batch of petitions, has found 2 such levy of external development charges to be justified and has held that the said petitioners and other similarly situated persons who have developed the colonies cannot be absolved of their liability to pay such external development charges merely on the ground that they have sold off the plots of land in question that was converted from agricultural to residential purposes. This Court proceeded to decide the said batch of petitions with the following order and directions: “Accordingly this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioners to deposit the aforesaid external Development Charges at the rate of Rs. 50/- per sq. meter of the area of the colony developed by them as notified to them by the impugned demand notices by the respondent – UIT within a period of 3 months from today i.e. on or before 31st May 2008. The respondent UIT, Sriganganagar is also expected and bound to undertake such external Development works within the stipulated time frame. A period of six months is allowed to them from the date when such money is deposited which is required to be deposited within three months from today as already stated above i.e. on or before 31.5.2008. If such external Development charges are not deposited by any particular petitioners or colonizers as aforesaid, the respondent – UIT shall be free to proceed in accordance with law for cancellation of regularisation or conversion of agricultural into residential area and cancel the pattas if already issued. If said money is deposited as aforesaid, the respondent – UIT is directed to undertake the requisite development works of Link roads, sewerage lines etc. within a period of six months from the end of May, 2008. If such work is not undertaken and completed on or before 30.11.2008, upon an appropriate application filed in this regard, this Court may consider fixing of responsibility on the officers concerned of the respondent – UIT, Sri Ganganagar. If the external Development Charges are deposited by the petitioners, the respondent – UIT will also consider 3 and issue appropriate patta in favour of the persons to whom the plots have been allotted and sold by the petitioners.” Thus, essentially the challenge as put by the said petitioners to such development charges was not sustained; and, following the decision aforesaid, similar challenge in the present writ petition cannot be sustained either; and, therefore, this writ petition is required to be, and is, dismissed but with the similar nature directions with the modification herein that the petitioners shall deposit the amount of external development charges as per demand notice dated 05.05.2005 (Annex. 3) within a period of three months from today, i.e., on or before 23.12.2008 and, on the petitioners' making such deposit, the respondent – UIT would be bound to take and complete such external development works within six months of such deposit, i.e., on or before 23.06.2009. Obviously, the other directions in the aforesaid order dated 03.03.2008 would also apply and if such external Development charges are not deposited by petitioner, the respondent – UIT shall be free to proceed in accordance with law for cancellation of regularisation or conversion of agricultural into residential area and cancel the pattas, if already issued. However, after making deposit by the petitioners, if the works would not be undertaken or completed before the stipulated time, upon an appropriate application filed in that regard, this Court would 4 consider fixing of responsibility on the officers concerned of the respondent – UIT; and, of course, the respondent UIT would issue appropriate patta in favour of the persons to whom the plots have been allotted and sold by the petitioners. There shall be no order as to costs. (DINESH MAHESHWARI), J. Mohan/