BHIM SAIN MITTAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THROUGH the instant writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India petitioner has challenged the order dated 31.12.2005 (Annexure P3), whereby respondent no.3 while exercising powers under Section 17(4) of the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977 (for short, "the HUDA Act") has ordered resumption of booth No.39, Sector 13, Urban Estate, Karnal along with forfeiture of an amount equivalent to 10% of the consideration money including interest etc. Challenge has also been raised to orders dated 3.7.2008 (Annexure P4) and 1.8.2014 (Annexure P7), whereby the appeal and revision petition against the order of resumption have been dismissed.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case are that booth No.39, Sector 13, Urban Estate, Karnal was allotted to the petitioner on 5.4.2004 and possession of the same was handed over to the petitioner in the year 2004. The petitioner paid 25% of the amount. He was required to pay balance amount in nine instalments. After paying two instalments and completing construction, Occupation Certificate was issued to the petitioner on 2.8.2004. After the issuance of the Occupation Certificate, a notice was issued to the petitioner that the petitioner has not paid the remaining instalments. Accordingly, the order of resumption dated 31.12.2005 (Annexure P3) was passed on the ground of non -payment of outstanding amount.

(3.) THE petitioner challenged the order of resumption dated 31.12.2005, by way of an appeal and deposited an amount of Rs.95,000/ - on 2.5.2006, however, the appeal was dismissed by respondent no.2 vide order dated 3.7.2008, not only on the ground of limitation but also on account of default of the petitioner in depositing the instalments. The order dated 3.7.2008, passed in appeal, was further challenged by the petitioner by way of revision petition which was also dismissed vide order dated 1.8.2014 (Annexure P7).