ADMINISTRATOR CIDCO Vs. SHAIKH MOHAMMED MUSTAQ AHMED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Revision Petition against the order dated 22.6.1993 in Appeal No. 295/92 by the State Commission of Maharashtra. The respondent in this Revision Petition was the complainant before the District Forum and will be described as the complainant in this order. Likewise, the appellant before the State Commission and the Opposite Party be- fore the District Forum and Revision Petitioner before us will be described as Opposite Party.

(2.) The Complainant is Shaikh Mohammed Ahmed, the Chief Promoter of the Beauty Hill Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Aurangabad. According to the complainant by virtue of his being the Chief Promoter, he had paid Rs. 50,000/- to CIDCO for plot No. 6 N-11 Sector M in New Aurangabad for allotment of the plot to the Co-operative Housing Society which was then to be formed. The total lease premium for the plot was Rs. 4,34,250/- which was required to be paid in two instalments in July and August, 1990. The Complainant society requested the Opposite Party CIDCO to extend the time for payment of the lease premium but instead of extending the time, it cancelled the allotment and forfeited the amount of Rs. 50,000/-.

(3.) The District Fourm and the State Commission, after examination, came to the finding that the forfeiture of Rs. 50,000/- and the cancellation of allotment of the plot amounted to imposition of penalty. It further held that the cancellation of the plot and forfeiture of the amount was without authority and that this amounted to deficiency in service inasmuch as before inflicting the penalty of forfeiture and cancellation, no reasonable opportunity was granted to the complainant. The State Commission confirmed the order of the District Forum quashing the cancellation of the allotment of the plot and forfeiture of the sum of Rs. 50,000/- paid as registration of the original plot be given to the society on payment of the full lease amount.