This writ petition challenged a notice demanding refund of excess payment post a sale deed. The Single Judge, Magaraju Srinivasa Rao, held the notice violated natural justice principles due to lack of hearing opportunity and quashed it.
Notice dated 14.05.2019 quashed; Petition allowed; authorities directed to give opportunity of hearing.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 37
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 40284 of 2019
Petitioner :- Balak Ram And Another Respondent :- State Of U P And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Achyut Jee,Raj Kumar Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Suresh C. Dwivedi
Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya,J. Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
Learned counsel for the petitioners prays for and is permitted to correct the description of respondent no. 5 during the course of the day.
By means of this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the notice/demand dated 14.05.2019, by which a sum of Rs. 8,73,600/- has been demanded as excess payment made to the petitioners pursuant to a sale deed executed by them in favour of U.P. Expressway Industrial Development Authority.
Sri M.C. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the U.P. Expressway Industrial Development Authority submits that number of such cases have been identified, where more than the deserving amount has been paid to the land holders while executing the sale deed, upon wrong appreciation of the location of the land and therefore a committee in this regard has been constituted under the Chairmanship of A.D.M. (Finance), which can look into these grievances.
It is to be noted that once a sale deed has been executed, how can this demand be made with regard to the excess payment. It appears that in the garb of the notice a direction has been issued to the petitioners, without giving any opportunity, to refund the amount.
Since the notice dated 14.05.2019 is in violation of the principles of natural justice, as such cannot be sustained and is hereby quashed. The authorities are at liberty to pass a fresh order with the approval of the aforesaid committee in accordance with law, after giving opportunity to the petitioners.
The writ petition to the aforesaid extent is allowed at this stage.
Order Date :- 10.12.2019 Pkb/
(Prakash Padia, J.) (Abhinava Upadhya, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a demand notice for refunding excess payment after a sale deed execution violates principles of natural justice.
Whether such a notice can be sustained without affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners.
Balak Ram And Another
State Of U P And 4 Others
Prakash Padia
Abhinava Upadhya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
