Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Birla,J.
The petitioner had opted for the allotment of a plot. The petitioner admittedly is a defaulter as he did not make the payments. The prayer made in this writ petition is that the cancellation order be set aside which is dated 19.6.2013. A consequential order dated 23.7.2013 intimating the same forfeiting the amount deposited by the petitioner has also been challenged.
The fact that the petitioner under the one time settlement offered by the Meerut Development Authority has not availed of it, is undisputed. In the circumstances, there is absolutely no reason or any logical conclusion which can be drawn for the purpose of interfering with the impugned orders as the petitioner has to blame itself for the same.
Sri Anurag Khanna then submits that the petitioner is ready with a cheque of Rs. 50 lakhs and that the petitioner be given the said plot together with interest payable with the amount which was due. There is no relief claimed to that effect as well so as to allow any indulgence to the petitioner.
The question of revival of the plot also cannot be considered inasmuch as it is stated at the bar that the same plot has been again put to auction scheduled to be held tomorrow.
Consequently, it appears that the petitioner has rushed up at this moment inspite of the fact that the impugned orders had been passed in June and July, 2013 to somehow forestall the auction. We are not inclined to entertain this writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to participate in the auction. Rejected.
Order Date :- 27.2.2014 Lalit Shukla