Court No. - 21
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 23076 of 2019 Petitioner :- Lehri Dutt Tyagi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shree Prakash Giri Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Bhupeshwar Dayal Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.
The petitioner's challenge, in this writ petition, is the order dated 6th June, 2019 passed by the Meerut Development Authority, Meerut; whereby, the petitioner has been called upon to deposit 10% surcharge in respect of his plot no. 16-A admeasuring 450 square meters allotted to him in Sector - 8 of Ved Vyas Scheme, Meerut.
The petitioner has challenged the said order, amongst other, on the ground that the order has been passed without furnishing any opportunity to him. In the supplementary affidavit, the petitioner has averred that no opportunity has been afforded to the petitioner before demanding 10% surcharge. It is stated that the respondents have no authority to demand 10% surcharge on the multiple reasons.
However, since we are disposing of this writ petition only on the ground of the breach of natural justice, we are not adverting to the various grounds raised in this writ petition on merit of the case.
We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel and Shri Bhupeshwar Dayal for the respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4. With their consent, the writ petition is taken on the Board and the same is being decided at this stage finally in terms of the Rules of the Court.
From the averments made in the supplementary affidavit and the impugned order, we are, prima facie, satisfied that the opportunity has not been furnished to the petitioner. The same respondents have demanded 10% surcharge against one Shri Ramesh Chauhan. He had also challenged the said notice by means of Writ C No. 22754 of 2019 on the similar grounds. This Court has passed the following order:-
"In view of the above, it is shown by the petitioner that the order has been passed in utter disregard to the principle of natural justice. It is a trite law that if an order has a civil consequence, in that event the person against whom such order is passed is entitled for hearing. Hence, we find that the impugned order stands vitiated on the ground of violation of principle of natural justice.
Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order dated 06th June, 2019 passed by the fourth respondent and remit the matter back to the second respondent to consider it afresh and pass the appropriate order in accordance with law. The petitioner is granted liberty to file a representation against the demand notice issued by the fourth respondent within ten days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The second respondent shall pass the appropriate order after furnishing opportunity to the petitioner expeditiously.
Thus, the writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs."
Shri Bhupeshwar Dayal for the respondent nos. 2, 3 & 4 has very fairly submitted that this writ petition be also disposed of in terms of the earlier writ petition.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of in the same term.
Order Date :- 22.8.2019 Amit Mishra