Haryana Urban Development Authority, Panchkula and others vs Rajesh Kumar and others

Satish Kumar Mittal, J.—This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by Haryana Urban Development Authority, as usual, against the judgment dated 20.07.2011 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 1234 of 2010, whereby the order of eviction after resumption dated 18.01.2010 passed by the Financial Commissioner, has been set aside.

During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the appellants fairly conceded that in terms of the order dated 21.4.2006 passed by the Administrator, HUDA while setting aside the order of resumption, the private respondents had paid the entire outstanding amounts with penal interest and penalty, though a little bit late, but this is a matter of fact that as of date no amount is outstanding against the private respondents. Learned counsel further fairly conceded that the private respondents have further paid the amount claimed as per order dated 5.7.2007 passed by the Administrator, HUDA. Moreover, nothing was due on the date the judgment was passed by the learned Single Judge.

In view of these admitted facts, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by the learned Single Judge for setting aside the order of eviction which was passed after passing the order of resumption.

Dismissed.