SHANTI VERMA Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE original writ petitioner Chandra Deo Prasad Verma died on 30.04.2005 and has since been substituted by his three daughters, namely, Smt Shanti Verma, Smt Kamla Devi and Smt Prem Sheela.

(2.) THE original petitioner was allotted on 11.02.1981 (Annexure -1) a Middle Income Group House constructed by the Bihar State Housing Board being House No. 165 at Lohianagar, Kankerbagh, Patna. The said allotment letter indicated that the tentative price of the building alongwith the land was calculated at Rs. 61,292/ - but the same was subject to revision on basis of cost of acquisition escalating or cost of development escalating or cost of building escalating. If there be any such escalation, the same would be payable by the petitioner and the demand thereof would be binding on the petitioner, who would not demand any justification for the same. The petitioner was required to pay Rs. 38,650/ - within thirty days in a single instalment and the balance of Rs. 42,042/ - shall be paid in ten years alongwith interest of Rs. 6,407.55 P per month if the same instalment is deposited in the beginning of every month. Petitioner immediately deposited the amount as demanded and on the very next day, agreement (Annexure -2) was executed in relation to the said House No. MIG 165. The said agreement clearly showed that the petitioner had already been a tenant of the said premises since 26.04.1978 which indicates that the house was ready and occupied by the petitioner since 1978 itself. This agreement reiterated the terms of letter of allotment including the escalation clause in the contingencies mentioned therein. It was stated therein that on full payment being made as per the agreement the Board would execute renewable lease of ninety years. The petitioner, accordingly, having deposited the initial amount as demanded and the monthly instalments with due interest as fixed, demanded registration of lease as per the agreement. This went on for some tine. In between, petitioners received communications that huge amounts were due to it but obviously as petitioner had made timely payments, they were not pursued by the respondent -Board.

(3.) NOW in 1999 that is almost two decades after the house was constructed on the already acquired lands and almost two decades after petitioner's occupation thereof and almost two decades after its allotment to the petitioner, the impugned communications are issued by the respondent -Housing Board informing the petitioner that as on 30.04.1999, the final dues of the petitioner in respect of the house allotted to him is about Rs. 1,70,641/ - which the petitioner was required to deposit immediately. As noted above, in 1981 when the house was allotted to the petitioner, the tentative cost, as disclosed, was about Rs. 61,000/ - which having been paid, a further sum of over Rs. 1,71,000/ - was being demanded. This prima facie unreasonable demand brought the petitioner to this Court.