LAWS(P&H)-2013-11-81

JAGROOP SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

Decided On November 18, 2013
Jagroop Singh and Anr. Appellant
V/S
State of Punjab and Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Concisely, the relevant facts, which are essential for deciding the instant writ petition are that, in the wake of open auction, the petitioners-allottees had jointly purchased the Booth bearing No.79, situated at Urban Estate-2, Part-2, Pocket-B, Bathinda, on 23.04.2008, for a total sale price of Rs. 12,02,040/- from Bathinda Development Authority (for brevity "the BDA"). Initially, they had paid 10% and subsequently deposited 15% of the total amount within the stipulated period of 30 days. As per terms & conditions of the allotment letter dated 13.06.2008 (Annexure P-1), the balance amount of 75% was to be deposited in four yearly equal installments. The allotment was governed by the provisions of Punjab Regional and Town Planning & Development Act, 1995 (hereinafter to be referred as "the Act") and the relevant Rules framed thereunder. Thereafter, the petitioners-allottees did not deposit a single installment and moved an application(Annexure P-2) for surrender/cancellation of the Booth on 14.05.2012, after the expiry of period of payment of the installments. The Estate Officer accepted the surrender and cancelled the allotment of Booth. At the same time, he forfeited 10% of the total price of the indicated Booth including interest, by means of impugned order dated 30.05.2012(Annexure P-3). The appeal filed by them was also dismissed by way of impugned order dated 24.08.2012(Annexure P-4) by the Appellate Authority and the revision petition was dismissed as well, vide impugned order dated 28.12.2012 (Annexure P-5) by the Revisional Authority.

(2.) Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners-allottees have preferred the present writ petition, to challenge the impugned orders(Annexures P-3 to P-5), invoking the provisions of Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, going through the record with his valuable assistance and after considering the entire matter, in our opinion, there is no merit in the instant writ petition in this context.