Court No. - 21
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 27573 of 2019 Petitioner :- Asheesh Mehrotra Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Prashant Kumar Singh,Deo Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel and Mr. Anil Tiwari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 2. With their consent the writ petition is taken on Board and is being finally disposed of in terms of the Rule.
The petitioner is aggrieved by the action on the part of the District Magistrate who is not giving effect to the order passed by the Real Estate Regulatory Authority- Lucknow-respondent No. 2.
It is stated that the petitioner had approached the second respondent by way of a complaint No. 1020172056 (Asheesh Mehrotra vs. M/s Direct Sales Private Ltd) for refund the entire amount paid to the promoter within 45 days.
It is stated that the petitioner has moved a complaint, upon the said complaint the second respondent has passed the order dated 6.6.2018 in the following terms:
** mijksDr foospuk ds vk/kkj ij mRrjnkrk izkseksVj esllZ feLV Mk,jsDV lsYl izk0fy0 dks ,rn}kjk vkns'k fn;k tkrk gSA fd vkoaVh f'kdk;drkZ Jh v'kh"k esgjks=k }kjk tek dh x;h /kujkf'k :0 2175136-00 :0 mUgsa /kujkf'k tek djus dh frfFk ls LVsV cSd vkQ bf.M;k }kjk gkse yksu ij fu/kkZfjr ,e0lh0,y0vkj0 ds cjkcj okf"kZd C;kt nj ij C;kt lfgr vkns'k ds 45 fnu ds vanj okil djsA foi{kh izkseksVj }kjk vk'k; dk vuqikyu u fd, tkus ij f'kdk;rdrkZ vkoaVh dks ;g vf/kdkj gksxk fd m0iz0 Hkw lEink fofu;ked izkf/kdj.k ds ek/;e ls vkns'k dk fdz;kUou djk ldsA bl vkns'k dk mYy?ku m0iz0 Hk lEink ¼fofu;eu rFkk fodkl½ vf/kfu;e 2016 dh /kkjk 63 rFkk vU; lqlaxr izkfo/kkuksa ds vUrxZr n.Muh; gksxkA vkns'k vkt fnukad dks 06-06-2016 gLrk{kfjr rFkk mn?kksf"kr fd;k x;kA** Pursuant thereto, a recovery certificate has also been issued on 7.1.2019. The grievance of the petitioner is that section 40 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 enjoins that if the order passed by Tribunal is not complied with further action shall be taken in terms of Rule 23 of the U.P. real estate regulation and development rules, 2016 provides the manner of the recovery of interest penalty and compensation which reads as under:
“23- Subject to the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 40, the recovery of the amounts due as arrears of land revenue shall be carried out in the manner provided in local laws.”
In view of the above, we are of the view that ends of justice would be subserved in issuing a direction upon the District Magistrate, the third respondent to recover amount as a land revenue as provided under Rule 23 expeditiously preferably within three months. If there is no other legal impediment.
With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 22.8.2019 SY