- (1.) The present writ petition has been preferred by Kanshi Ram through his attorney Sh. Rajesh Mittal, claiming a writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 17.04.2014 whereby the petitioner has been held liable to pay simple interest at the rate of 12.5% per annum and penal interest at the rate of 4% per annum. The petitioner has also claimed a writ of certiorari for quashing the letter dated 24.06.2014 whereby transfer of plot No.94 was made subject to circular No.31 dated 06.03.2013 issued by respondents.
(2.) The Market Committee, Jagadhari invited applications for sale of plots in open auction in Anaj Mandi, Jagadhari in the year 1991. The plot No.94 measuring 20 x 50 feet in Anaj Mandi, Jagadhari, was allotted to the petitioner-Kanshi Ram vide letter of allotment dated 16.05.1991. The allottee was to make payment of Rs.2,58,000/- in six yearly installments along with interest at the rate of 12.5 %.
(3.) It is asserted that the Market Committee, Jagadhari, failed to deliver possession of the site allotted even after deposit of 25% of the amount for the reason that the amenities such as water facilities, street lights and underground sewerage were not made available. The allottee was unable to construct on the plot allotted. The Market Committee claimed interest and extension fee which was disputed in appeal by the allottee before the Chief Administrator, Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board, Panchkula (for short 'the Board'). In the said appeal, reference was made to an order passed by the Financial Commissioner & Principal Secretary to Government of Haryana, Agricultural Department on 22.07.2010 in respect of another allottee. After referring to the said order it was observed as under:- "It is an admitted fact that the said order was implemented by the respondent market committee in letters and spirit and the respondent committee charged the interest upon those plot holders in terms of the aforesaid orders. It is also an admitted fact that plot in question was sold through the same auction and allotment letter also contains the same terms and conditions. The facts and circumstances of the present appeal is squarely identical with the facts and circumstances of plot No.92 and 101 of New Grain Market. Being the similar facts and circumstances and sold the plots in the same mode in the same Market yards, it is not justifiable to dispose off the present appeal differently. The matter in issue has already been adjudicated by the Revisional Court while deciding the numbers of revision petitions of the plot holders of same auction. The government authority should adopt the same approach while deciding the matter involving the similar facts and circumstances. Therefore, the similar behaviour should be met to the present appellant also and the relief granted vide order dated 06.09.2012 should also be extended to the present appellant. Otherwise it will invite the litigation and cause grave and manifest injustice to the appellant. Keeping the above, the present appeal is disposed off in same terms of order dated 22.07.2010 passed by the Revisional Court. It is need to be clarified that the appellant is liable to pay the interest, penal interest and extension fees in the aforesaid terms from the date of allotment till the date of depositing the balance amount. The respondent market committee is hereby directed to give the calculations to the appellants within 15 days from the receipt of this order and the appellant will deposit the same within two months and construct the shop as per the approved plan within a period of 4 months from the date of receiving the said calculation. The failure to do so, the market committee is hereby directed to resume the plots in accordance with law. Be communicated.";