GOYAL AND COMPANY Vs. UNION TERRITORY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER was allotted a commercial site in Sector 20, Chandigarh on lease hold basis by allotment letter dated May 22, 1985, Annexure P-1, on the terms and conditions embodied therein and also those incorporated in the lease executed by him, in pursuance of an application made on February 17, 1985. The total premium in respect of the site was Rs. 3,52,666/ -. The rent of the site for first 33 years was Rs. 8,816. 65 paise per annum. A sum of Rs. 90,000/- was deposited alongwith the application towards 25% of the premium. The remaining 75% of the "premium of the site was payable in three equal instalments including interest, falling due on May 22, 1986, May 22, 1987 and May 22, 1988, besides the ground rent. The lease was to be governed by the provisions of the Chandigarh Lease Hold of Sites and Buildings Rules, 1973. The petitioner failed to abide by the conditions of lease as embodied in the allotment letter and also those contained in the 1973 Rules, inasmuch as the petitioner failed to make the payment of second instalment of premium which fell due on May 22, 1987. Consequently, the Estate Officer, Union Territory, Chandigarh proceeded against the petitioner under rule 12 (3) of the Rules ibid and while cancelling the lease of the site allotted to the petitioner, ordered the forfeiture of Rs. 35,267/- being 10% of the total premium plus ground rent and interest pertaining to the period from May 22, 1987, i. e. the date when the payment of second instalment was due, to the date of the said order dated November 15, 1988, Annexure P-11.

(2.) AGAINST the aforesaid order of the Estate Officer, the petitioner preferred an appeal under rule 22 of the Rules ibid, before the Chief Administrator which was dismissed by order dated September 5, 1989, Annexure P-12. However, the petitioner met with partial success in revision before the Advisor to the Administrator, U. T. Chandigarh, who by order dated March 28, 1990, Annexure P-13 ordered the restoration of lease of the site in question to the petitioner subject to his paying/depositing the outstanding dues of arrears of installments, interest, ground rent and forfeiture etc. on or before May 31, 1990, failing which the revision was to be deemed to have been dismissed' and the order of the Estate Officer to have come into operation.

(3.) THROUGH this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing that part of the order of the Advisor (Annexure P-13) whereby forfeiture of ground rent, interest calculated upto November 15, 1988 and the amount equivalent to 10% of the total premium has been upheld in revision.