Daya Sharma vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors

The petitioner, by way of this petition, has prayed for refund of the amount of Rs.7,57,714/- alongwith the interest at the rate of 24% per annum and

to quash the demand relating to interest on the due monthly installments as raised vide demand letter dated 21.2.2018 as well as the interest amount

claimed vide demand letter dated 27.3.2018.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Secretary, Urban Development & Housing Department (hereinafter referred to as ""UDH"") had

issued an order dated 19.2.2018 laying down that those allottees who had been allotted houses prior to 1.1.2001 in EWS and LIG (Lower Income

Group) level, would be exempted from payment of interest and penalty, if they deposited their pending installments in one go. The said benefit was

also extended to those who were allotted houses after 2001 also. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner was allotted a house under the said

category bearing no.192/382, Pratap Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur on 30.12.1982 for which the allotment/ possession of letter was issued on 23.1.2009. The

Rajasthan Housing Board issued a demand letter for payment of the entire amount upto 21.2.2018 calculating the one single payment mode by

calculating monthly installments. However, while issuing the demand interest on due monthly installments of a sum of Rs.7,16,105/- was imposed

although the same had also been exempted by the Secretary, Urban Development Department vide notification dated 19.2.2018. Learned counsel

further submits that apart from the said amount another demand letter was issued on 27.3.2018 demanding a sum of Rs.29,950/- as additional amount

of interest. Learned counsel that the said demand was contrary to the aforesaid decision of the State Government. Learned counsel submits that

although the petitioner deposited the entire amount on 22.3.2018, it is submitted that the same was required to be refunded back to her. Learned

counsel submits that an application was moved for refund of the said amount but the same has not been refunded on a spacious plea that on the day

when refunding application was moved, there was no amount pending with the Housing Board and therefore, the interest amount which has also been

deposited cannot be refunded.

Feeling aggrieved of the denial letter dated 11.5.2018, the petitioner has preferred this petition before this court. Learned counsel submits that once,

there was a decision dated 19.2.2018, the same had to be applied to all the persons on or after 19.2.2018 equally. Merely because the petitioner has

deposited the amount, the respondent cannot be allowed undue enrichment and the petitioner cannot be placed at a worst position than those who did

not deposit the amount.

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the Rajasthan Housing Board submits that the petitioner had deposited the entire amount on her own

volition and she had not been forced to deposit the amount by the Housing Board. Admittedly, she was a defaulter in payment of installments and

interest was therefore required to be paid on the delayed payment of installments. Learned counsel also submits that the order passed by the

Secretary, UDH dated 19.2.2018 was implemented by the Rajasthan Housing Board in terms of the directions issued by the Finance Adviser dated

22.3.2018 and therefore, it would no application to the demand letter issued prior to 22.3.2018.

I have considered the submissions and perused the material available on record.

The petitioner deposited the amount on 22.3.2018 including the interest on the installments which was a sum of Rs.7,16,105/- as interest on monthly

installments. As regards the demand raised vide letter dated 27.3.2018 is concerned, there is no document to show that the demand raised as above of

Rs. 29,950/- was deposited by the petitioner as there is no such receipt on record. The petitioner has been vigilant in depositing the entire amount,

however, that would not deprive her of the benefit of exemption of interest on annual installments as granted by the Secretary, UDH vide his

notification dated 19.2.2018. The petitioner cannot be placed in a worst position than those who have not bothered to deposit the entire amount before

or after 22.3.2018. The contention of the learned counsel for the respondent that they have implemented the decision of the Secretary, UDH on

22.3.2018, would have no application and the exemption would relate back from 19.2.2018 itself as the notification stipulates that it would come into

force w.e.f. 19.2.2018 onwards.

Keeping in view thereto, the petitioner would be entitled to refund of the said amount of Rs.7,16,105/- which is the interest demanded on

installments vide demand letter dated 21.2.2018 and to the said extent, the demand raised by the respondent is held to be unjustified. The said amount,

as noted above, shall be refunded to the petitioner alongwith interest at the rate of 18% per annum. The rate of 18% interest is being applied because

the Housing Board has also calculated the interest amount at the rate of 18%.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that amount of interest on monthly installments was additionally paid of a sum of Rs.29,950/- also,

however, the said receipt is not on record. However, if the petitioner produces the said receipt to the authority, the amount of Rs.29,950/- shall also be

refunded alongwith the interest, as noticed above. Compliance shall be made within a period of one month, failing which, the petitioner shall be free to

initiate contempt proceedings without further reference to the court.

The writ petition is accordingly allowed. All pending applications stand disposed of.