INDERJIT CHOPRA Vs. UNION TERRITORY ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has prayed for quashing of the orders Annexures P-1 and P-2 passed by the Assistant Estate Officer, exercising the powers of the Estate Officer, and the Chief Administrator, Union Territory, Chandigarh-respectively.

(2.) There is no dispute between the parties that S.C.O. Site No. 363, Sector 32D, Chandigarh was allotted to the petitioner in 1983 for a premium of Rs. 4,11,000/- and that after obtaining possession of the site by paying 25% of the premium, the petitioner has paid all the instalments in accordance with the letter of allotment. It, however, appears that there is some dispute between the parties about the ground rent payable by the petitioner. However, instead of initiating action under Rule 13 of the Chandigarh Lease Hold of Sites and Building Rules, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules"), the Assistant Estate Officer issued notice to the petitioner under Rule 12(3) of the Rule and passed the order Annexure P.1 for cancellation of the lease and forfeiture of 10% of the premium. His appeal was dismissed by the Chief Administrator.

(3.) After hearing Shri Deepak Thaper and Shri Subhash Goyal, we are convinced that the orders impugned in this petition deserve to be quashed.