JAGDEEP SINGH SIDHU Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER CO-OP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present writ petition, the petitioners have challenged order Annexure P. 9 dated 25.5.1999 passed by the Financial Commissioner (Cooperation), Punjab, Chandigarh exercising the powers of the State Government under the Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 (for short the Act).

(2.) The case set up by the petitioners is that in the year 1999, land measuring 619 Kanals l9 Marias was acquired by the Punjab State Federation of Cooperative House Building Societies Ltd. (for short HOUSEFED), for the construction of a Co-operative Housing Complex, at Dabwali Road, Bhatinda. The land was acquired at the rate of Rs. 45,000/- per acre. The petitioner's case is that the HOUSEFED had invited applications for allotment of plots at the Housing Complex Dabawali Road, Bathinda and the petiti6ners along with other members of the Society applied for the allotment of the plots. It is the further case of the petitioners that as per the original plan the built up houses were to be allotted which were subsequently abandoned and a decision was taken that only developed plots were to be given at the rate of Rs. 110/- per square yard. The price of the plots thereafter was enhanced to Rs. 300/- per square yard. The petitioners were allotted different plots in the draw of lots held on 20.4.1990 and copy of one of such allotment letter has been annexed as Annexure P. 2 with the present writ petition. As per the terms and conditions of the allotment 25 per cent of the cost was to be paid on allotment and balance 75 per cent was to be paid in 8 equal half yearly installments along with interest at the rate of 15 per cent per annum.

(3.) The petitioner were aggrieved by charging of interest on installments on the plea that the interest could be charged only after the physical possession of the plots was handed over to them. Representation, in this regard was also made to the Secretary, Co-operation for waiving of interest. It is the case of the petitioners that on the representation the interest was waived off for first two installments vide letter Annexure P. 3 dated 19.8.1990. The respondents, according to the petitioners, had also undertaken to develop the plots within one year and the possession was to be handed over to them on 1.4.1991 i.e. before the first installment became due. The case of the petitioners is. therefore, that the Secretary, Co-operation, had accepted the plea of the petitioners that no interest shall be charged without handing over the physical possession of the plots. The petitioners further pleaded that even though assurance was given that the plots would be handed over on 1.4.1991 but the same could not be done as provisions of Colonisation Act were not complied with by the HOUSEFED while drafting the original plan and therefore, the original site plan had to be changed and thereafter fresh draw of lots was held on 10.1.1992 and by the said date the committed date of handing over the possession had expired. Respondent No. 4, thereafter changed the second plan and fresh draw of lots was held on 10.4.1993 at Chandigarh at the back of the petitioners and finally the plots were allotted to the petitioners on 29.9.1993. It is the case of the petitioners that in view of the different developments from time to time, the matter was already settled on 26.8.1992 when interest was waived off till handing over of actual possession. It is also the case of the petitioners that the Court enhanced the compensation and in view of the enhancement of additional price, Rs. 40/- per square yard was demanded from them vide letter No. 235 dated 22.2.1995 (copy attached as Annexure P6. with the present writ petition). It is the case of the petitioners that though compensation was enhanced with respect to the whole land under the development project, the enhancement of compensation is being claimed from the petitioners though it should not have been spread over to the whole project and part of it should have been paid by the HOUSEFED. This claim is based on the fact that 25 plots and market comprising shops etc. were not allotted to the members of the Society and was, infact, sold by respondent No. 4 in an open auction and thereby they earned about 1.5 crores. It is the case of the petitioners that after demand of additional price of Rs. 40/-per square yard was raised, the Managing Director of HOUSEFED issued a letter dated 20.2.1995 giving an offer of possession of plots subject to the production of "No Dues Certificate" by 15.4.1995. It is the case of the petitioners that the demand was being raised in respect of the fact that it was within knowledge of the HOUSEFED that element of interest should be waived off till the delivery of physical possession and thus, the case of the petitioners is that this offer was with the object to dislodge the claim of the petitioners with regard to the waiver of interest The petitioners further alleged that the plots was not fully developed.