VIJAY SONI Vs. CHIEF COMMISSIONER UNION TERRITORY CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Is the action of the Chandigarh Administration in imposing penalty @ 100% for less than a year's delay in deposit of the ground rent arbitrary and unfair? This is the short question that arises for consideration in this petition.

(2.) The petitioners were allotted the Shop-cum-office Site No. 130-131, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh on a leasehold basis at a premium (price) of Rs. 60 lacs. The petitioners had paid 25% of the amount of consideration. Thereafter, on 21/03/1995, the letter of allotment was issued. A copy of the letter has been produced as Annexure P.1 with the writ petition. The remaining amount viz. 75% of the premium had to be paid in three yearly instalments on or before March 10 of the years 1996, 1997 and 1998. The petitioner had also to pay an annual ground rent @ Rs. 1,50,000.00.

(3.) It appears that there was some delay in the payment of the third instalment which was due to be paid during the period in 1998. The Estate Officer issued an order dated 27/10/1998 directing the petitioners to make the deposit of the amount due on account of the instalment towards the payment of the premium along with a penalty of 10%. He further directed the petitioners to pay the amount due on account of ground rent with a penalty @ 100%. The payment was directed to be made by 18/11/1998. A copy of the order is at Annexure P.2. Aggrieved by the order, the petitioners filed an appeal before the Chief Administrator. It was dismissed on 26/02/1999. A copy of this order is at Annexure P.3 with the writ petition. A revision petition was filed. It was partly allowed. The penalty of 10% for delay in deposit of the instalment was reduced to 5%. However, in respect of the penalty for delay in deposit of the ground rent, the Adviser chose not to interfere with the order passed by the subordinate authorities. A copy of the order has been produced as Annexure P.4 with the writ petition. The petitioners allege that the action of the respondents in imposing a penalty @ 100% for a delay of about eight months in depositing the ground rent is wholly arbitrary and unfair. On these premises, the petitioners pray that the impugned action be annulled.