Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, June 27
Admonishing HUDA for compelling the allottees to approach the courts on the issue of condoning delay in the initial payment of 15 per cent price, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has asked the authority to decide the matter in terms of earlier policy and decisions.

The ruling by Justice Satish Kumar Mittal and Justice Amol Rattan Singh came on a petition filed by Surender Kumar. Allotted a residential plot in Sector 62, Faridabad, in June, 2003, he deposited 10 per cent of the tentative price.

As much as 15 per cent of the total cost was to be deposited within 30 days from the issuance of the allotment letter. The HUDA Estate Officer cancelled the allotment as he could not deposit the amount within the stipulated period due to financial constraints following his mother’s ailment,

In his appeal before the HUDA Administrator, the petitioner said he was willing to pay 15 per cent amount along with interest and penalty. But the appeal was dismissed vide an order dated February 27, 2004.

His revision petition was disposed of by the Financial Commissioner-cum-Principal Secretary, Town and Country Planning Department, in February, 2009, with a direction that his case be considered by the HUDA Chief Administrator as per the relevant policy and guidelines issued from time to time.

The petitioner contended that he was compelled to approach the “revisional authority” again after his claim was not considered. The “revisional authority” on May 25, 2011, observed that the petitioner had given a list of cases where the delay in making 15 per cent payment had been condoned for a period ranging from 156 days to 362 days.

It asserted a similar treatment should have been given to the petitioner; and the HUDA Chief Administrator should take a decision within 30 days as per the policy applicable at the time of allotment.

The petitioner added till date the direction had not been complied with. Taking up the matter, the Bench observed: “If the facts are correct, it is a matter of great concern. It has been observed by us that in many such cases, the allottees are being compelled to approach this court, when in spite of directions issued by the competent authority/court, officers of the HUDA are not taking action in accordance with law”.

The Bench disposed of the petition without issuing notice of motion to avoid delay with a direction to consider his case in terms of the directions issued by the “revisional authority”, earlier policy, and subsequent decisions “with regard to relaxation of payment of 15 per cent amount of the cost of residential and commercial plots”.