Disposed

Ashok Kumar Choudhary v. the Rajasthan Housing Board

Rajasthan HC17 Nov 2023CW/5765/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan quashed a penalty notice and directed the Housing Board's Commissioner to pass a speaking order on a pending representation regarding the source of power for the penalty and the reasons for its imposition within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No. 1 to pass a speaking order on the pending representation with specific reasons within 3 months.

Ashok Kumar Choudhary Vs the Rajasthan… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:39483]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5765/2020

¶4

Ashok Kumar Choudhary S/o Shri Anna Ram, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Plot Number 9/337 Kudi Bhagtasni Housing Board, Jodhpur (Raj.).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The Rajasthan Housing Board, Through Its Housing Commissioner, Awas Bhawan Jan Path, Jyoti Nagar, Jaipur 302005.

¶8

The Sampada Prabhandhak, Rajasthan Housing Board Circle First, Sector 8, Kuri Bhagtasani Yojna, Jodhpur (Raj.).

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Ashok Choudhary- petitioner
	present inperson.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Amit Tatia

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

¶12

Order

¶13

17/11/2023

¶14

Petitioner herein seeks issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing impugned notice dated 22.05.2020 (Annexure/1) and directing the respondents to refund the amount recovered as penalty vide receipt dated 25.06.2020 (Annexure/2) with interest at the rate of 9% per annum.

¶15

Succinct facts first, as pleaded in the instant petition.

¶16

2.1 Vide a notice dated 22.05.2020, the Housing Board demanded Rs. 47,804/- as penalty imposed for not constructing a house on the plot in question. Petitioner deposited the same on 25.06.2020 and a receipt thereof was issued.

(2 of 3)

[2023:RJ-JD:39483]

[CW-5765/2020]

2.2 However, subsequently the Housing Board issued an order on 07.07.2020, whereby the delay in construction was condoned. It is also stated in the order that there was though no condition in the allotment letter for making construction on the allotted plot within the prescribed time, but further two years' time was granted for construction on the allotted plot by condoning the past delay.

¶21

2.3 On 09.07.2020, the petitioner submitted a representation, contending that since there was no condition for construction period in the allotment letter/perpetual lease, the penalty has been wrongfully imposed and recovered from the petitioner. Therefore, the same may be refunded. No action has been taken till date on the representation. Hence, this writ petition.

¶22

Heard.

¶23

On a court query as to under which provision of law or terms and conditions of allotment, penalty has been imposed, learned counsel for the respondent is unable to show any. Even in the impugned notice/order, in the absence of the competent administrative authority giving any cogent reasons qua the source of his power to impose penalty and the reasons transpiring the invocation of such power, this Court is also left guessing and unable to properly adjudicate.

¶24

No doubt, the administrative authority is not supposed to pass orders like judicial functionaries on receipt of every representation. However, given the nature of dispute raised herein, there are likely to be many others similarly placed persons/allottees as the petitioner herein, who would have been

(3 of 3)

[2023:RJ-JD:39483]

[CW-5765/2020]

meted out the same consequences for non-construction within certain time frame as envisaged, it would be therefore more appropriate that in order to avoid any discrimination or heartburn, grievance of the petitioner is looked into by passing by taking an administrative decision by giving reasons after due application of mind.

¶29

The writ petition is disposed accordingly dispose of with the direction to respondent No. 1, the Housing Commissioner, to pass a speaking order on the pending representation by providing specific reasons as to why the contentions raised therein were given a short shrift. Needful be done within a period of 3 months from the date of petitioner approaching him with copy of the instant order.

¶30

Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

¶31

(ARUN MONGA), J

¶32

79-ns.

Ashok Kumar Choudhary v. the Rajasthan Housing Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Kumar Choudhary v. the Rajasthan Housing Board

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

Lrs of Anoop Singh Vs Ashok Kumar

Rakesh Bagaria Vs State of Rajasthan

Anu Mehta Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt. Heera Bai Vs Smt. Shanti Devi and Ors.

Murli Manohar Vs Sub Divisional Officer,Sub Division Office Collectorate, Jodhpur

Vijendra Kumar Vs Au Small Finance Bank Ltd.