JAGDISH PARSHAD Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has assailed the orders dated 27.4.1993 (Annexure P-2) and dated 27.12.2001 (Annexure P-5) by way of the present writ petition.

(2.) THE petitioner, who was allotted Booth Site No. 30, Sector 7, Panchkula, was required to make deposit of the price as per the stipulations incorporated in allotment letter dated 3.10.1987 (Annexure P-1). However, he failed to do so despite the last date for deposit of instalments had expired on 5.10.1992. Accordingly, proceedings under Section 17(1) to (4) of the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977 (for short 'the Act') were initiated against the petitioner and vide order dated 27.4.1993 (Annexure P-2), the site in question was resumed along with forfeiture of 10% of the money deposited by him. He filed an appeal against the said order on 28.9.2001. The reason for this inordinate delay is that the petitioner had taken recourse to the filing of the suit which culminated in the filing of the Regular Second Appeal wherein it dawned on him that the proper course would have been to file an appeal against the order of resumption upon which he withdrew the Regular Second Appeal and challenged the said order. Thereafter in appeal before the competent authority also, neither the petitioner nor his counsel appeared and consequently, the same was dismissed on both counts, i.e. of delay as well as on merits.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 opposed the prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioner and sought dismissal of the writ petition.