- (1.) Challenge in this writ petition is lo the order dated 20.12.2007 (Annexure P-12), whereby the representation submitted by the petitioner in compliance with order dated 04.05.2006 passed by this Court in CWP No. 12624 of 2002 directing the petitioner to file a detailed representation before the Estate Officer for adjustment of the lease rent and proportionate reduction of the amount claimed by the respondents despite not providing the amenities such as roads drainage, street lights etc. from the date of allotment of the plot for constructing a Shop-cum-Office (hereinafter referred to as 'SCO') till the date of grant of possession as also providing of the amenities was declined. Challenge is also to the order passed by the Joint Secretary Finance exercising the powers of Chief Administrator, Union Territory, Chandigarh dated 02.06.2009 (Annexure P-14), vide which the appeal preferred by the petitioner was partly allowed by granting him the benefit of non-charging of ground rent/lease amount from the date of allotment of the plot till the date of grant of possession i.e. 11.12.1998 to 17.01.2000 and declining the benefit of proportionate adjustment of the amount due to non-providing of basic amenities.
(2.) Briefly the facts arc that the petitioner purchased SCO site No. 34, Sector 33-D, Chandigarh in an open auction held on 11.12.1998. The physical possession could not be given to him of the plot because of a mango tree standing on the site. The tree was removed on 11.12.1999 and possession handed thereafter on 17.01.2000 to the petitioner of the plot. The petitioner preferred CWP No. 12624 of 2002, which was dismissed on 13.08.2002. On a Special Leave Petition preferred by the petitioner, the case was remanded back to the High Court vide order dated 28.02.2006 for fresh consideration. This Court disposed of the writ petition vide order dated 04.05.2006 directing the respondents to file a detailed representation before the Assistant Estate Officer within a period of four weeks, on such submission, the Assistant Estate Officer was to examine the representation and pass a detailed speaking order within four months after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner or his counsel and the departmental representative. The review petition preferred by the petitioner in this Court was dismissed and then, he approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, which, vide order dated 26.03.2007, enlarged the time as granted by the High Court to file the representation by one month while dismissing the Special Leave Petition.
(3.) The petitioner submitted a representation, which was duly considered by the Estate Officer as per the directions of the High Court and declined the same vide order dated 20.12.2007 by observing that the petitioner was only entitled to the relief relating to the ground rent and interest from 19.12.1998 to 19.12.1999, which had already been provided to him on an earlier representation preferred by him. An appeal was preferred against this order which has been partly allowed by granting him the benefit to the extent that the ground rent shall be payable w.e.f. 17.01.2000, which had been earlier granted to him till 19.12.1999. The other claims made by the appellant were rejected leading to the filing of the present writ petition.;