Court No. - 21
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 29792 of 2018 Petitioner :- Vinod Mittal Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dhiraj Srivastava,Sri B.K. Srivastava (Sr. Advocate) Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,M.D.Rai,Madan Lal Rai,Satyendra Pratap Singh
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Singh Baghel,J. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 30.03.2017 issued by the Finance and Account Officer, Saharanpur Development Authority, Saharanpur demanding a sum of Rs.4,01,94,878.95 against sanctioning of the map for development of housing colony.
The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner has submitted a map for the development of a housing colony. On 09.09.2015, a demand notice was issued by the respondents and the petitioner was required to pay a sum of Rs. 2,95,51,726.00. It is stated that the petitioner deposited the said amount in some installments. Thereafter he moved a revised plan. Pursuant to the submission of the revised plan, a fresh demand notice of Rs. 4,01,94,878.95 was issued.
It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has already deposited Rs.2,95,51,726.00 and the fresh demand is overlapping the first notice. It is stated that there is no justification to demand exaggerated amount of Rs.4,01,94,878.95.
A counter affidavit has been filed, wherein it is mentioned that fresh demand is raised pursuant to the order of the State Government whereby the rate has been increased from Rs.220/- per sq.meter to Rs. 700/- per sq.meter.
From the pleadings of the writ petition and the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, we find that the matter needs determination of the amount.
We have heard Sri Dhirendra Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.P.Singh, learned counsel for the Development Authority and the learned Standing Counsel for the State.
Having due regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that at the first stage the development authority shall determine the development charges keeping in view that the petitioner has already deposited more than Rs.2.0 crore.
Accordingly, we dispose of the writ petition with a direction upon the respondent no.2 to consider the cause of the petitioner expeditiously after giving an opportunity to the petitioner. We grant liberty to the petitioner to submit a comprehensive representation within two weeks from today. In the event such representation is filed, the respondent no.2 shall pass a reasoned and speaking order within two weeks thereafter. Needless to say that we have not expressed our opinion on the merits of the case and the authority concerned shall pass an order independently in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 23.1.2019 MAA/-