Disposed

Rajinder Kumar Gautam v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC24 Sept 2010CWP/17237/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged an order by the Ludhiana Improvement Trust enhancing the cost of an allotted MIG flat. The Court held it cannot adjudicate causes of cost escalation or construction delays via a writ petition but allowed the petitioner to approach an appropriate forum.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed to approach an appropriate forum for adjudication of issues regarding cost escalation and delay in construction.

Rajinder Kumar Gautam Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Property and Title | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.17237 of 2010 Date of Decision : September 24, 2010.

¶3

Rajinder Kumar Gautam

¶4

..... Petitioner

¶5

versus

¶6

The State of Punjab and others

¶7

..... Respondents

¶8

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

¶9

Present : Mr.Raj Kaushik, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶10

-.-

¶11

1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶12

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶13

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶14

(Oral) Surya Kant, J.

¶15

The petitioner has been allotted a MIG Flat in Model Town Development Scheme, Part-I, Ludhiana, by the Improvement Trust, Ludhiana, vide allotment letter dated 16.12.2002 (Annexure P-1) on the tentative cost of Rs.8,90,000/-. The Improvement Trust, however, served the petitioner with a notice dated 15.2.2010 (Annexure P-6) informing that the cost of the flat has been additionally enhanced to Rs.3,70,000/- and the final price was Rs.12.80 lacs for the ground floor; Rs.12.60 lacs for the first floor and Rs.12.40 lacs for the second floor.

¶16

Aggrieved, the petitioner approached this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.4146 of 2010 which was disposed of on 100.3.2010 (Annexure P-7) with a direction to the respondent-authorities to re-consider and

¶17

C.W.P.No .17237 of 2010 2

¶18

furnish the details so as to justify the enhanced amount. Pursuant thereto, the Improvement Trust has passed the impugned order dated 20.8.2010 (Annexure P-10) wherein it is explained that due to increase in the cost of construction, the Trust has increased the final price of the flat.

¶19

In my considered view, the question as to who is responsible for the delay in construction and/or the cause of escalation of construction costs, cannot be adjudicated upon by a Writ Court. In this view of the matter, no interference with the impugned order dated 20.8.2010 (Annexure P-10) is called for except to observe that the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach an appropriate forum for adjudication of the issues raised in this writ petition.

¶20

With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶21

Dasti.

¶22

September 24, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE

Rajinder Kumar Gautam v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajinder Kumar Gautam v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gurpreet Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Jaswinder Kaur Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Ashwani Kumar Vs Punjab State Power Corporation & Ors.

Mohan Lal Modi Vs Financial Commisionr Rev. Pb and Ors.

Employees Provident Fund Organization Vs Punjab Financial Corporation and Another

Sachin Udassi Vs State of Punjab & Ors.