- (1.) Np Infra Private Limited through its Director and another is before this Court for a direction to quash the order dated 15.6.2016 passed by the Vice Chairman, Mathura-Vrindavan Development Authority (MVDA) and for further direction to respondent nos.2 and 3 to forthwith execute the sale deed of the plot in question in favour of the petitioners without insisting on payment of the disputed amount of Rs.3.5 crores.
(2.) At the very outset Shri C.B. Yadav, learned Addl. Advocate General assisted by Shri Shashank Shekhar Singh has opposed the writ petition on the ground that against the impugned order the petitioner has got alternative efficacious remedy to approach to the State Government as per the provisions contained under Section 41 (3) of the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 (in short "the Act of 1973").
(3.) As per record, this much is reflected that the petitioner no.1 is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, which is engaged in the business of development of real estate in the city of Vrindavan-Mathura. The petitioner no.2 is one of the directors of the company. The dispute in the present petition relates to Plot No.GH-08 admeasuring 15257 Sq. Mtrs. situated in Rukmani Vihar Awasiya Yojna, Vrindavan. The said plot has been reserved for the purposes of construction of a group housing colony. The said plot was auctioned by the respondent no.2-MVDA on 29.06.2010. The petitioner being the highest bidder in the said auction, the bid was finalized in its favour at Rs.12,695 per sq. mtr. A letter of allotment dated 7.7.2010 was issued to the petitioner company containing payment schedule. The total value of the plot in question was determined at Rs.19,36,87,615/- and the amount in question was to be deposited by the petitioner in six monthly equal instalments amounting Rs.3,55,89,280/- starting from 7.12.2010 to 07.05.2013. Admittedly, the petitioner could not deposit the instalment in time but simultaneously sought the benefit of one time settlement (OTS) scheme floated by the MVDA. The petitioner, however, disputed the interest that was so calculated by the MVDA in accordance with the scheme, which was floated as per the direction of the State Government and therefore the petitioner had proceeded to approach this Court by means of Writ Petition No.64562 of 2015, which was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 26.11.2015 with direction to the Vice Chairman, MVDA to decide the application of the petitioners. Pursuant thereto the claim of the petitioner was considered and rejected by the Vice Chairman, MVDA vide order dated 18th February, 2016. Aggrieved with the said order the petitioner again approached this Court by means of Writ Petition No.9293 of 2016 and this Court vide order dated 29.2.2016 had again proceeded to dispose of the said writ petition with following observations:- "The dispute basically between the petitioners and the Development Authority is regarding the amount of interest to be charged while settling the dues of the petitioners under the OTS. The chart prepared by the Charted Accountant depicts the balance amount as Rs. 13,68,43,330/-, while according to the Development Authority, the amount due as on 31 December 2015 is Rs. 17,18,68,508/-. According to the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel for the Bank, the interest has to be calculated in accordance with Government Order dated 29 November 2011. The submission of learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners is that the Vice Chairman of the Development Authority has failed to take into consideration the facts stated in the representation submitted by the petitioners. Sri C.B. Yadav, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Nishith Yadav has submitted that the chart prepared by the Development Authority is in accordance with the said Government Order and that prepared by the Charted Accountant is not in accordance with the Government Order. We have considered the submissions advanced by learned Senior Counsel for the parties. It transpires that the order passed by the Vice Chairman of the Development Authority does not deal with the objections filed by the petitioners and the chart prepared by the Chartered Accountant has also not been taken into consideration. The Vice Chairman of the Development Authority was required to deal with the objections while examining the representation filed by the petitioners. Non consideration of the objections has vitiated the order passed by the Vice Chairman of the Development Authority and the representation needs to be examined afresh. However, as even according to the petitioners, an amount of Rs. 30.68 crores was required to be paid as on 31 December 2015, the Vice Chairman of the Development Authority can be directed to re-examine the matter only after the petitioners deposit Rs. 14 crores with the Development Authority. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner on the instructions received from the petitioners has stated that this amount of Rs. 14 crores shall be deposited by the petitioners within a period of one month from today. This petition is, accordingly, disposed of with a direction that in the event, the petitioners deposit an amount of Rs.14 crores with the Chairman of the Development Authority within a period of one month, the Vice Chairman of the Development Authority shall re-examine the issues raised by the petitioners in the representation regarding interest amount within a period of four weeks thereafter. The order impugned shall abide by the order that will be passed by the Vice Chairman of the Development Authority.";