- (1.) THE short question that arises for our consideration in this petition is whether the period of 90 days has to be counted w.e.f. 15.5.2003, the date on which the notice was served on the petitioners to deposit free hold amount or from the next date i.e., 16.5.2003?
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that on 30.1.1999, the petitioner applied under the policy of the State Government for getting their residential Nazul Plot No. 7 free hold. The petitioners deposited 25 percent of the free hold charges. The petitioners on 15.5.2003 received a notice dated 8-5.2003 by which they were directed to pay Rs. 3, 44, 212.56 as balance amount of free hold charges within a period of 90 days from the receipt of the notice. Rs. 36, 446.25 as transfer charges and Rs. 234.50 as lease rent were also demanded. On 13.8.2003, the petitioners deposited the free hold charges and other charges as demanded by the respondents within 90 days of the receipt of the notice after availing the rebate of 20 per cent on the free hold charges as was provided in the Government Policy. On 20.10.2003, the petitioners received a notice dated 15.10.2003, by which the petitioners were directed by the respondents to deposit a further sum of Rs. 86, 612.90 as according to the respondents the petitioners were not entitled for rebate of 20 per cent on the amount of the free hold charges as the amount as per the notice received on 15.5.2003 was not paid within a period of 90 days but was paid on the 91st day from the date of receipt of notice. The petitioners on 26.10.2003 filed their reply and stated that they had deposited the amount of free hold charges within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of notice excluding the date on which the notice was received by them. The District Magistrate, Saharanpur passed an order dated 17.1.2004, which was communicated by the respondent No. 2, Nagar Palika Parishad, Saharanpur to the petitioners along with the letter dated 10.2.2004, which was received by the petitioners on 20.2.2004. It is this order which has been challenged by the petitioners in this writ petition. We have heard Shri Mukesh Prasad, learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for respondents No. 1 and 3. Shri C.S. Singh who has appeared for respondent No. 2.
(3.) THE only question involved in this writ petition is as to whether the date on which the petitioners received notice from the respondents has to be counted or it has to be excluded from the period of 90 days for depositing the amount so that the petitioners may avail the benefit of 20 per cent rebate in depositing the free hold charges. The learned Counsel for the parties have very fairly informed the Court that there is no Rule which provides that from when the period of 90 days will start running. Therefore, in such a situation the provisions of General Clauses Act, 1897 and U. P. General Clauses Act, 1904 which are pah materia, have to be considered. Section 9 of the U.P. General Clauses Act, 1904 is extracted below: “Commencement and termination of time. - In any (Uttar Pradesh) Act it shall be sufficient, for the purpose of excluding the first in a series of days or any other period of time, to use the word “from” and, for the purpose of includ­ing the last in a series of days or any other period of time, to use the word “to”. ;