Civil Writ Petition No.18632 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (1) Civil Writ Petition No.18632 of 2008 Date of decision:09.09.2009. Sh. Subhash Chand and others ...Petitioners Versus The State of Haryana and others ...Respondents (2) Civil Writ Petition No.21689 of 2008 Date of decision:09.09.2009. Smt. Indra ...Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH Present: Mr. Anil Kshettarpal, Advocate, and Mr. S.N.Pillania, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Ashish Kapoor, Advocate, for respondent Nos.2 and 3. ***** JASBIR SINGH, J. (ORAL). This order will dispose of 2 writ petitions bearing Nos.18632 and 21689 both of the year 2008, involving similar questions of law and facts. To dictate order, facts are being taken from CWP No.18632 of 2008. This writ petition has been filed to lay challenge to an orders dated 07.10.2008 (P-7 to P-16) vide which plots, in Grain Market, Pipli, District Kurukshetra, were offered to the petitioners, at a price which was prevalent in the year 2008, instead of at the price at which plots were sold in the year 1992 in a draw of lots. Counsel for the parties heard. Civil Writ Petition No.18632 of 2008 -2- It is apparent from the records that, as per the then existing policy, the petitioners were allotted plots in a draw of lots, held on 18.11.1992 for a price Rs.2,33,800/- each. As per directions of the respondent – Market Committee, petitioners deposited 25% amount of the total price of the plots within 30 days. In the meantime, on 11.12.1992, some applicants, who were not satisfied with the draw of lots, came to this Court by filing CWP No.16198 of 1992, wherein it was alleged that the persons other than the growers were allowed to participate in the draw of lots and the plots were allotted to them without any justification. On 11.12.1992, following order was passed by this Court: - “Ld. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the persons other than growers have not been allowed to participate in the draw of lots. Notice of motion for 18.01.1993. Draw of lots be not finalized concerning growers.” It is apparent from the records and not disputed in this Court that one of the petitioners, namely Rulda Ram, wrote a letter on 06.12.1995 (P-4), in which he made an offer to the respondent – Committee for deposit of the balance 75% amount of the price for plot allotted to him. However, vide letter dated 15.12.1995 (P-5) respondent No.3 intimated him as under: - “In reference to your application dated 06.12.1995, you are hereby informed that there is a stay on the allotment of Grower category by the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court. You will be informed as soon as this case will be decided. Along with this, you are also informed that remaining Civil Writ Petition No.18632 of 2008 -3- installment will be determined after the allotment of plot and construction cannot take place without allotment.” The balance amount was not accepted on the ground that writ petition was pending in this Court. Admittedly, that writ petition was dismissed by this Court on 29.02.2008 (P-6). Thereafter, the petitioners moved applications before respondent No.3 for allotment of plots to them. Then applications were processed and the matter went to the respondent No.2 (the Board) and following agenda item was put for consideration in a meeting of the Board: - “Approval of plots sold through draw of lots to the growers held on 18.11.1992 of Market Committee, Pipli. It was stated price of land and shops have increased many times since 1993 and proposed that 75% price of plot has not been recovered till now and Market Committee/Board suffered a loss in shape of interest, therefore, this interest should be included in the reserve price which is to be charged from allottees. In 182th meeting of Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board held on 17th June 2008 vide Agenda Item No.10, following orders were passed by Board : - Approved. The rate of interest should be charged as per policy of the Board.” As per decision taken, the above said proposal was approved and it was further decided that rate of interest should be charged as per policy of the Board. Counsel for the petitioners, by making reference to policy for allotment of plots framed by the respondent – Board, states that amount now being claimed is on the higher side. To say so, reference Civil Writ Petition No.18632 of 2008 -4- has been made to instruction No.12(3) & (4) of the Consolidated Instructions regarding Sale of Plots by Auction/Allotment (P-1) issued by respondent No.2. Above said instructions reads thus: - “12(3)The balance amount of 75% shall be paid either in lump sum within a period of one month from the date of allotment letter without any interest, in six half yearly installments with interest at 12.5%. 12(4) In case of default in payment of installment by 10th of the next month in which it falls due, the defaulter shall be charged compound interest @ 12% p.a. Calculated at half yearly slabs along with additional penal interest at the rate of four percent on installment(s) defaulted.” Upon notice, reply has been filed, wherein it has been stated that as on today, in view of change in the policy, the petitioners are not entitled to get the plots. However, with a view to favour them, it was decided to allot plots to them on the present market price. This Court is of the opinion that the stand taken by the respondent – Board is absolutely harsh and unjustifiable. Entitlement and eligibility of the petitioners is to be seen as on 18.11.1992, when draw of lots was conducted, wherein plots was allotted to them. They also deposited 25% amount of the price fixed by the Board. However, letters of allotment were not issued to them on account of a fact that some persons had filed a writ petition in this Court, wherein the Board was restrained from finalizing the draw of lots. In the meantime, even offer was made by some of the petitioners to deposit the balance 75% amount, towards price of the plot. However, by making reference to the pending writ petition, amount was not accepted. That writ petition was dismissed on 29.02.2008. Thereafter, the process regarding allotment Civil Writ Petition No.18632 of 2008 -5- of plots was initiated. No objection was raised regarding eligibility and entitlement of the petitioners. The matter went up to the respondent No.2 (the Board) and in its meeting dated 17.06.2008, the respondent – Board gave approval to the selling of plots, to the petitioners, as per draw of lots held on 18.11.1992. It was further approved that rate of interest be charged as per policy of the Board. Obviously, it means that on the balance amount, interest was to be imposed and the property was not to be sold at the prevalent market price. Counsel for the petitioners very fairly undertake that the petitioners shall pay simple interest @ 12.5% per annum on the balance amount, as has been mentioned in instruction No.12(3) of the Consolidated Instructions regarding Sale of Plots by Auction/Allotment (P-1) in case plots are allotted to them. This Court feels that even as per above said instructions, on balance amount of 75% of the price, the interest is to be charged, in case, amount is to be paid by installments. The allotment letters were issued on 17.10.2008. As per instructions, accruing of interest will start thereafter. However, in view of undertaking given by counsel for the petitioners, the authorities may charge interest after the date of depositing of 25% amount towards price of the plots allotted i.e. from January 1993. There is no question of imposing of compound and penal interest as is envisaged in No.12(4) of the Consolidated Instructions regarding Sale of Plots by Auction/Allotment (P-1) because no default was committed by the petitioners, at any time, regarding payment of the amount towards price of the plots. In view of facts mentioned above, these writ petitions are allowed. Orders Annexures P-7 to P-16 (in CWP No.18632 of 2008) and Annexure P-7 (in CWP No.21689 of 2008) are set aside only to the Civil Writ Petition No.18632 of 2008 -6- extent of fixing price of the plots. The authorities are directed to re-determine amount due, from the petitioners, by imposing interest @ 12.5% (simple) per annum regarding balance 75% amount of the price of the plots from 01.01.1993. On intimation, the petitioners shall deposit that amount in lump sum within one month. Counsel for the petitioners state that some of the petitioners had already deposited the amount in question. Disposed of. September 09, 2009 (JASBIR SINGH) vinod* JUDGE