Rai Singh vs DSIDC

Gita Mittal, J.—This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner who submits that he was allotted an industrial plot against the relocation scheme floated by the respondent and that he has made payment of a total amount of Rs. 30,000/- to the respondent. It is contended that despite receipt of earnest money, the respondents have refused to accept the balance amount in instalments and have thus acted illegally. A prayer is made for a direction to the respondent to afford the petitioner an opportunity to deposit the amount towards the relocation scheme in instalments.

The writ petition is opposed by the respondents who have filed their detailed counter affidavit submitting that a provisional letter was issued to the petitioner on 22nd October, 2001 finding him eligible for allotment of an industrial plot. On 7th May, 2004, the petitioner was allotted plot No. 55, Sector 1, Pocket C, Bawana admeasuring 100 sq. mtrs. and was directed to make deposits in terms of the letter of allotment. The petitioner failed to make payment. A final opportunity was given to the petitioner to deposit the amount by the letter dated 7th February, 2005 with interest at the rate of 18% failing which the allotment would stand cancelled. The petitioner wrote a letter dated 19th February, 2005 requesting for making the payment in instalments. This request was denied by the letter dated 9th March, 2005. The respondents have submitted that the petitioner has made payment of only an amount of only Rs. 38,952/- and has failed to pay the balance amount as a result of which he is disentitled to any relief in this writ petition.

There is no dispute that the letter of allotment was issued to the petitioner on 7th May, 2004 whereof he was informed of the amount payable. Despite repeated reminders, the petitioner failed to make deposit of the amount. The petitioner has pointed out that in the various communications which have been addressed, the respondents did not disclose as to what is the balance amount which is payable. Even in the counter affidavit filed before this Court, the respondents have stated the amount which the petitioner has paid to the respondents without disclosing the amount payable. I find that the last letter filed on record by the DSIDC is dated 17th April, 2006. Even in this letter the DSIDC has notified the petitioner that in order to avoid any action of cancellation of allotment the petitioner should pay 100% of the cost of the plot with interest at 18% with marginal penalty of Rs. 5000/- to the DSIDC failing which the plot shall be treated as cancelled. Therefore even till the date of issuance of this letter there was no cancellation effected and an opportunity was being given by the respondents. The petitioner filed this writ petition shortly thereafter on or after the 20th April, 2006. The respondents, I find, however did not disclose the balance amount which is payable by the petitioner.

So far as the prayer for instalments is concerned the petitioner has admittedly not paid any amount since as back as in May, 2004 when the allotment was effected in his favour. Even so far as the instalments were concerned, the petitioner could very well deposited the amounts with the respondents. In any case, the petitioner has had adequate opportunity to assimilate the amount payable to the DSIDC towards the allotted plot. No further opportunity thus deserves to be granted. I however find substance in the petitioner''s contention that he could have made the deposit only if he knew what amount had to be deposited by him. The respondents have not disclosed this amount anywhere.

Accordingly this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the DSIDC to intimate to the petitioner the balance amount which is due and payable by him towards the plot allotted in terms of the letter dated 17th April, 2006. The respondent shall serve this demand upon the petitioner by registered post and the petitioner shall be required to make deposit of the amount which is found due and payable within a period of four weeks of the receipt of the demand.

This writ petition and CM No. 6108/2006 are disposed of in the above terms.