Petitioners filed a writ petition to quash orders forfeiting 10% of their deposited amount. The Court found no error of law or jurisdiction and dismissed the petition relying on a coordinate Bench decision in Preet Inder Singh.
Writ petition dismissed.
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.
Civil Writ Petition No.8333 of 2015
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.8333 of 2015 Date of Order: 01.05.2015
Sh. M.P.Gupta and others
..Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
..Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMOL RATTAN SINGH
Present: Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate, for the petitioners.
RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral)
The petitioners pray for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing orders dated 18.07.2012 (Annexure P-3), 24.01.2013 (Annexure P-4) and 13.01.2015(Annexure P-5), passed by the Estate Officer, GMADA, Mohali, the Additional Chief Administrator, GMADA, Mohali (exercising the powers of Administrator) and the Special Secretary, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Government of Punjab, Chandigarh, whereby 10% of the amount deposited by the petitioner has been forfeited.
Counsel for the petitioners submits that as there is no provision for forfeiture and the petitioners have surrendered the plot, the respondents had committed an error of law in order forfeiting of 10% of the amount.
We have heard counsel for the petitioners and find no error of jurisdiction or of law in the impugned orders. While deciding a similar writ petition, pertaining to an adjoining plot, a coordinate Bench has, vide order
NARESH KUMAR 2015.05.06 14:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
-2-
Civil Writ Petition No.8333 of 2015
dated 23.04.2015, passed in Civil Writ Petition No.20902 of 2014 (Preet Inder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and others), dismissed the writ petition. We find no reason to differ with the opinion recorded by a coordinate Bench. The discretion exercised by the authorities in forfeiting 10% of the amount deposited by the petitioners cannot be faulted. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(RAJIVE BHALLA) JUDGE
May 01, 2015 nt
(AMOL RATTAN SINGH) JUDGE
NARESH KUMAR 2015.05.06 14:23 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether there was an error of jurisdiction or of law in orders forfeiting 10% of the amount deposited by the petitioner despite surrender of the plot.
Whether the writ petition can be allowed in light of the opinion recorded by a coordinate Bench.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Preet Inder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and othersRelied on¶19
Sh. M.P.Gupta and others
State of Punjab and others
RAJIVE BHALLA
AMOL RATTAN SINGH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
