ASHWANI ARORA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal filed under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment dated 25.4.2011 rendered by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition by holding that no direction could be issued to the respondent Haryana Urban Development Authority (for brevity, 'HUDA') to restore back the resumed plot in favour of the Attorney Holder of the original allottee at the current market rate.

(2.) There is no dispute as to the facts of the present case. On 4.2.1988, the respondent-HUDA allotted a commercial plot bearing No. 190, in Sector 25, Panipat, in favour of M/s Pal Transport Service, Panipat. It was required to pay 75% price of the plot in 8 half yearly instalments. The allottee failed to deposit the price of the plot as per the terms and conditions of the allotment. Due to his failure to make payment, a notice under Section 17(1) of the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977 (for brevity, 'the Act'), dated 13.1.1995, was issued to the allottee, which was followed by another notice dated 5.11.1998. Subsequently, notices under Section 17(2) of the Act, dated 20.4.1999 and 19.6.2001 were issued. Still further, notices under Section 17(3) of the Act were also issued to the allottee from time to time and penalty of Rs. 28,105/- was also imposed on 28.8.2001. On 12.10.2001, a show cause notice under Section 17(3) of the Act was issued, which was also served on the allottee. On 15.1.2002, an order under Section 17(4) of the Act was passed affording an opportunity of being heard. However, the allottee neither deposited the due amount nor appeared on the fixed date of hearing before HUDA authorities. The petitioner-appellant Ashwani Arora is a General Power of Attorney holder of M/s Pal Transport Service, Panipat-original allottee, which was executed on 15.11.1999 by Shri Manmohan Singh, proprietor of M/s Pal Transport Service. The petitionerappellant has claimed that he had immediately submitted a copy of the GPA to the Estate Officer-respondent No. 3 with the request that in future all the correspondence be made on his address.

(3.) On 20.3.2002, an order of resumption was passed by the Estate Officer, HUDA, Panipat. On 27.1.2004, the petitionerappellant filed an appeal, which was dismissed vide order dated 18.2.2005 (P-3). The said order was challenged in revision, which was also dismissed on 22.9.2008 (P-4). Aggrieved against the said orders, the petitioner-appellant has filed the petition relatable to the instant appeal.