GIRDHARI LAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of connected Civil Writ Petition Nos. 4798. 4840, 4956 and 4957 of 1982 as common questions of law and fact are involved. The facts have, however, been extracted from Civil Writ Petition No. 4798 of 1982.

(2.) On 14.12.1973, plot bearing No. 112 measuring 20' x 125' situated in Mandi Township, Abohar was auctioned by the Administrator, New Mandi Townships, Punjab, in favour of the petitioner who happened to be the highest bidder for consideration of Rs. 64,200/-. An amount equivalent to 25% of the bid money was paid on the same very date against a receipt. As per terms and conditions stipulated in the allotment letter, the balance amount was to be paid in six half yearly instalments along with 6% interest per annum. However, as the petitioner did not pay anything after making payment of 25% of the total amount i.e. Rs. 16,050/- he received notice dated 8.9.1975 from the Administrator, New Mandi Townships, Punjab, respondent No. 2 calling upon him to pay the amount due along with penalty of Rs. 9,564.20 on or before 30 days but neither any amount was paid nor any reply was submitted. Thereafter the petitioner was served with a registered show cause notice dated 11.11.1975 to deposit an amount of Rs. 18,792.95 failing which action to resume the plot and forfeit the amount already paid by him was to be taken. It was further mentioned in the aforesaid notice that the property allotted to the petitioner shall be re-auctioned and if there would be any loss while re-auctioning the plot, the same would be recovered from the petitioner as arrears of land revenue. The notice was acknowledged by the petitioner but no reply was filed. Consequently vide order dated 24.5.1976 Annexure P3, the Administration, New Mandi Townships, Punjab, Chandigarh resumed the site along with structure, if any, thereon and forfeited the whole of the money paid by the petitioner in respect of the plot. It is this order which has been challenged in the present petition.

(3.) With a view to seek writ i.e. writ in the nature of certiorari so as to quash Annexure P3, it is pleaded that respondent No. 2 at the time of auction represented that proper amenities like metalled roads and other facilities would be provided for which no amount would be recovered from any allottee and in spite of repeated requests having been made to provide roads, street lights, water supply and other amenities, no auction was taken in the matter. The very purpose for which the plots were purchased by the petitioner, it is maintained, could not be achieved as the plots could not be put to any meaningful use as the basic amenities were not provided. It is for this reason it is pleaded, that the petitioner did not deposit the due instalments. Further it is the case of the petitioner that Section 13 of the Punjab New Mandi Townships (Development and Regulation) Act, 1960 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act) is ultra vires of the Constitution being violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(f) of the Constitution of India as was so held by a Division Bench of this Court in "Dharam Pal etc. v. State of Punjab", 1978 PunLJ 396. The order Annexure P3 which has been passed in exercise of powers vested in the Administrator under Section 13 is, thus, styled to be illegal and without jurisdiction.