Disposed

Montu Kalra@Vikas Kalra v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC9 Jan 2012CWP/3655/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana disposed of a writ petition challenging an order demanding an extension fee from a plot owner. Finding a report stated the ground floor was constructed as per norms, the court directed the Administrator to consider waiving the fee under a 2004 policy.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Administrator to consider waiving off the extension fee in terms of the policy dated 23.04.2004.

Montu Kalra@Vikas Kalra Vs State of Haryana… — Company and Corporate | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Civil Writ Petition No.3655 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision:- 09.01.2012

¶3

Sh. Montu (Vikas Kalra)

¶4

...Petitioner

¶5

Vs.

¶6

The State of Haryana and others

¶7

....Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL

¶9

Present: Mr. Gaurav Bakshi, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶10

Ms. Palika Monga, DAG, Haryana, for respondent No.1.

¶11

Mr. Manish Bansal, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 2 to 4.

¶12

HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral)

¶13

The challenge in the present petition is to an order dated 14.01.2009 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Financial Commissioner-cumPrincipal Secretary to Government of Haryana, Town & Country Planning, exercising the revisional jurisdiction of the State Government under the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977 against the order dated 21.02.2007 passed by the Administrator, HUDA, Faridabad, claiming extension fee of Rs. 1,56,950/-.

¶14

The petitioner purchased plot No. 1744 in Sector 9, Faridabad, vide registered sale deed dated 31.05.1995 (Annexure P-5). As per the said sale deed, there was a constructed room with water and sewerage connection. The petitioner was issued re-allotment letter by the Estate Officer, HUDA, Faridabad, on 10.07.1995.

¶15

On 13.11.2006, the Estate Officer, Faridabad, issued a

¶16

demand notice claiming extension fee of Rs 1,56,950/- for the reason that the construction of the plot in question was not complete and the petitioner has not applied for completion certificate. The Administrator, HUDA affirmed the demand raised by the Estate Officer, vide order dated 21.02.2007. The revision was dismissed on 14.01.2009, the order impugned in the present writ petition.

¶17

Today, an affidavit has been filed by Mr. Manish Bansal, Advocate, on behalf of Estate Officer, HUDA, Faridabad. Reference is made to a report of Sub Divisional Engineer, Survey, regarding construction of the building on the plot in question. As per said report, full ground floor has been constructed. The construction is said to be old, but it has been stated that the period of construction cannot be verified. The construction is also said to be as per norms. But, it is reported that revised building plan and completion certificate has not been obtained by the owner of the plot. The affidavit further discloses that there is a policy dated 23.04.2004. As per the said policy, the extension fee can be waived off by the Administrator on the basis of house tax assessment report of the Municipal Corporation, Faridabad, subject to the condition that the request for completion certificate is submitted within one month.

¶18

Since as per report, the ground floor has been constructed, which is as per norms, therefore, we dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to the Administrator to consider the waiving off the extension fee in terms of the policy dated 23.04.2004.

Montu Kalra@Vikas Kalra v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Montu Kalra@Vikas Kalra v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamlesh Rano & Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Anr.

Gulab Singh Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Bhai Ram Vs HUDA and Ors.

Sanjeev Kumar Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Har Narain Vs HUDA and Ors.

Daya Chand and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Anr.