IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.5886 of 1995 Date of decision: April 27, 2009. Dhanesh Kumar Singal ...Petitioner(s) v. Haryana Urban Development Authority & Anr. ...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: Petitioner in person. Shri O.P. Sharma, Advocate for the respondents. ORDER Surya Kant, J. - The petitioner seeks a restraint order against the respondent- HUDA authorities for not charging interest on the due installments. He also seeks a direction for completion of the development works in the area and thereafter only offer the possession of booth no.229, New Mandi Township, Ambala City; and re-schedule the installments which the petitioner is liable to deposit in terms of allotment letter dated 5.3.1991. Suffice it to say that the above mentioned reliefs have been sought by the petitioner on the plea that the respondents have failed to complete the development works. The respondents have filed their counter affidavit in which a categoric stand has been taken that the site was auctioned only after completion of the development works. The respondents have time and again reiterated that all the development works had been completed before the sites were put to auction and that some of the allottees have even constructed the shops and are running their business therefrom. Though the petitioner has filed a rejoinder controverting the respondents' claim regarding completion of development works, however, in the absence of any contrary material on record, I am inclined to accept the categoric stand taken by the respondents that the basic amenities had been provided before the sites were put to auction or that some of the allottees have constructed the shops and are running their business activities. For the reasons assigned in the decision of even date rendered in CWP No.16664 of 1992 (Vinod Mittal & Ors. State of Haryana & Ors.) no other relief can be granted to the petitioner except to direct the respondents to charge interest @ 10% per annum and communicate the arrears to the petitioner, which he is liable to pay as per Clause 5 of the allotment letter (Annexure P-1) also. The petitioner shall be liable to pay such arrears within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the notice failing which the respondents shall be entitled to recover the same along with penalty as per the terms and conditions of the allotment. Disposed of. April 27, 2009. [ Surya Kant ] kadyan Judge