RAJINDER SINGH SIDHU Vs. CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have approached this Court feeling aggrieved by order dated 9.1.2007/6.6.2007 (Annexure P-8) passed by the Estate Officer- respondent No. 3. They have also sought directions to the respondents not to charge ground rent, interest and penalty from the date of auction till the date of passing of order dated 6.6.2007 and to refund the amount deposited by the petitioners under protest in terms of letter dated 22.8.2007 (P-9).

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the petitioners are successful bidder in respect of S.C.O. No. 59, Sector 32-C, Chandigarh in an open auction held on 18.11.1997 by Chandigarh Administration-respondent for a total sum of Rs. 63,00,000/-. Letter of allotment was issued on 13.1.1998 (Annexure P-1). As per clause 4 of the letter of allotment a sum of Rs. 15,75,000/- paid by the petitioners was adjusted against the premium payable in respect of the lease. As per clause 5, the balance of 75% of the premium together with interest @ 10% per annum was required to be deposited in three equated annual instalments. The schedule of payment has been given in the allotment letter by adding the amount of interest @ 10% per annum. The first installment of Rs. 18,99,970/- was required to be made by 18.11.1998. Second and third installments of the same amount were required to be made on 18.11.1999 and 18.11.2000 respectively. In case of delay, interest @ 24% was required to be paid as per clauses 8-A, 9(a) and 9(b). After taking possession on 3.6.1998, the petitioners submitted the site plan and sanction was accorded on 9.10.1998. On 17.9.1998, the petitioners made a representation complaining that on excavation of earth upto 4 to 5 feet deep for the purposes of constructing basement, it was found on the site that main sewerage line of 10 to 12 feet diameter is crossing the site of S.C.O. No. 59, Sector 32-C, Chandigarh vertically and the digging had to be stopped. The petitioners, thus, requested that main sewerage connection may be changed so that they could start the construction work (P-2). The petitioners also sent a legal notice dated 20.11.1998 (P-3).

(3.) HON 'ble the Supreme Court remanded all the cases to this Court for deciding each case on its own merit (P-5). This Court further remanded the matter to the Assistant Estate Officer, Chandigarh Administration to examine the pleas raised by the petitioners and the petitioners were directed to file a detailed representation, vide order dated 9.5.2006 (P-6). The petitioners filed detailed representation on 31.8.2006 (P-7). The representation made by the petitioner has been decided by the respondent vide order dated 9.1.2007. After noticing the facts, the Estate Officer concluded that basic amenities like water, sewerage, kucha road and drainage etc. were provided prior to 18.11.1997, whereas road parking and street lights were provided at site on 28.1.2001 and 18.7.2002 respectively. With regard to shifting of the water supply/sewerage line under the plot, it has been found that the same was shifted/removed on 28.12.1999. The Estate Officer further found that no benefit could be given in terms of premium or any interest charged thereon, inasmuch as, no right of the petitioner to enjoy the property was curtailed. The Estate Officer also partly accepted the prayer of the petitioner not to charge the ground rent, interest and penalty for the period when encumbrances were brought to the notice upto the date when the same were removed. Furthermore, it has been ordered that the said period should be added towards the three years period permissible for raising construction on site as per the allotment letter. The Estate Officer went on to conclude with the following observation :-