TEJ PRATAP SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has impugned the letter of respondent No. 2 dated 27th March 2002 making a demand on the petitioner in respect of misuse charges and revised ground rent charges as well aS penalty and interest in respect of plot No. 48, Block No. 148,23 Barakhamba Road, New Delhi.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, has confined his grievance to the issue of revised ground rent charges in view of the fact that the petitioner had never impugned the misuse charges, penalty and interest earlier imposed since 1993 and in fact, had even given an undertaking to pay the said amount. In view thereof, it is not necessary to go into other issues.

(3.) The only contention advanced by leamed counsel for the petitioner is that in terms of a policy decision of the respondents dated 11th January 1995, the petitioner is entitled to a moratorium period instead of the revision of ground rent in view of there being stay orders from government/local authorities. This is in terms of para 3(c) of the said policy decision, the relevant extract of which is as under: