SECRETARY-CUM-COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES, HARYANA Vs. RAMESH CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been directed by the opposite parties against order dated 11.1.2001 passed by Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Narnaul (hereinafter to be referred as District Consumer Forum), vide which the complaint of respondent Ramesh Chand (complainant) was accepted and it was ordered that he was entitled to get plot No. 25B at the Industrial Estate, Narnaul @ Rs. 90.75 per square yard and further possession be delivered to him within a period of two months from the date of deliver of this order.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts are that the Director of industries, Haryana had invited applications for allotment of industrial plots in the Industrial area at Narnaul through advertisement. The respondent (complainant) had made an application for allotment of industrial plot on 26.3.1981 and deposited an earnest money of Rs. 838 in favour of Governor of Haryana in saving bank account No. 70209. He received letter of allotment dated 1.1.1982 regarding allotment of plot No. 25 in Industrial Estate, Narnaul and was directed to fulfil the formalities thereof. He was required to deposit Rs. 566.90 as 10% of the tentative cost of the plot as mentioned in the letter dated 1.1.1982. He deposited the said amount and got the allotment letter dated 18.12.1985. He took possession of the plot on 5.10.1987. But when he started construction, the same was stopped by the officials of Industries Department. Narnaul on 29.11.1987. He informed the department about the obstruction caused by the officials of industries Department telegraphically and by registered post.

(3.) IT was next averred that the respondent received letter dated 29.11.1987 from the Director of Industries, Haryana which was replied by him vide letter dated 29.4.1988. However, he was directed to appear before the Director of Industries, Haryana at Chandigarh but he could not appear on the date fixed as such his industrial plot was cancelled by the Director, Industries vide letter No. 10905 dated 21.10.1988 without giving any opportunity of hearing