CWP No.16049 of 2011 (O&M) Krishan Lal V/s Chief Administrator, UT, Chandigarh and another Present: Mr.Tribhawan Singla, Advocate for the petitioner. ***** The petitioner prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing order dated 08.06.2004 (Annexure P-4), passed by respondent No.2-Estate Officer, UT, Chandigarh, cancelling the lease of Booth No.136, Sector-15D, Chandigarh and order dated 06.05.2009 (Annexure P-8), passed by respondent No.2-the Chief Administrator, UT, Chandigarh, dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the booth in dispute was allotted to the petitioner on 04.05.1993. The petitioner was required to pay Rs.36,400/- as lease money, out of which he was required to pay 25% within 10 days of issuance of the allotment letter. The petitioner deposited 25% amount and thereafter as he fractured his hip bone, he could not carry on his business. The petitioner underwent surgery and during this period, his booth was illegally occupied by one Biplav Chakravarty by breaking open the lock. The petitioner appointed Sh.Mitra Nand Chamoli as his attorney, who filed a suit for eviction of Biplav Chakravarty. The Estate Officer initiated proceedings for cancellation of the allotment for failure to pay instalments and ground rent. The order, cancelling allotment was passed on 08.06.2004. The petitioner had no knowledge of this order. The petitioner came to know about this order when he visited the CWP No.16049 of 2011 (O&M) -2- booth in 2001 and was informed by other shopkeepers that officials from the Estate Office had come to seal the booth. The petitioner immediately filed an appeal and deposited Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs.One lac only) on 28.08.2007 vide draft dated 27.08.2007 as balance payment of the booth. Despite establishing sufficient cause for delay in payment, his appeal has been dismissed. I have heard counsel for the petitioner, perused the impugned orders and find no reason whether in fact, in law or in equity to interfere with the impugned orders. After payment of 25% of the total consideration in 1993, the petitioner did not pay a single penny whether towards the original consideration or the ground rent. Even after the cancellation order dated 08.06.2004, the petitioner did not file an appeal for three years. The petitioner paid Rs.1,00,000/- in 2007 thirteen years after the allotment and three years after its cancellation. The medical condition of the petitioner appears to be an attempt to garner sympathy and invoke equity. Upto the fracture of his hip bone in 1999, the petitioner had not paid any money towards balance instalments. As per averments in the petition, the petitioner recovered within 3/4 years but still did not deposit any money. The petitioner deposited Rs.1,00,000/- only when his booth was about to be sealed. At this stage, it would be necessary to emphasis that a large number of allottees/leases who have not paid the instalments for decades together have begun filing appeals and writ petitions praying CWP No.16049 of 2011 (O&M) -3- that cancellation/resumption orders be quashed. These appeals and writ petitions are the direct outcome of the phenomenal rise in prices of real estate, in Chandigarh. The petitioner remained silent for a period of more than 14 years, and even after the cancellation order was passed on 08.06.2004, did not come forward to discharge his liability. It is true that resumptions and cancellations, have an air of finality are, therefore, must be resorted to as the final resort. Where however, no attempt is made to discharge admitted liability and the default stretches to a decade or more, a misplaced sense of equity cannot be invoked to grant relief. The Estate Officer has, therefore, rightly cancelled the lease. The appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed by assigning clear and cogent reasons. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed in limine. 30.08.2011 [ RAJIVE BHALLA ] shamsher JUDGE