- (1.) This judgment of ours would dispose of Civil Writ Petitions No. 1270, 1283, 2975 and 5794 of 1985 as all these writ petitions raised substantially the same issues and the pleadings in the writ petitions also follow substantially the same pattern. Civil Writ Petition No. 1270 of 1985 is being treated as the main writ petition. It would, therefore, be convenient to refer to this petition and trace the facts therein :- Charanjit Bajaj, President, Urban Estate Welfare Association (Regd.) Karnal and others, whose names have been given in the memo of parties, purchased plots in the Urban Estate Karnal Sector 13 and most of them have already constructed their houses over those plots. The Government of Haryana enacted the Haryana Restriction on (Development and Regulations of) Colonies Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to place severe restrictions on the sale of plots for profit by colonisers with the twin objectives of ensuring well planned houses in fully developed colonies on the one hand and curbing the lust for profits by the real estate sharks. In consonance with the policy enshrined in the said Act the Government of Haryana issued an advertisement (copy Annexure P-1) announcing to the public the scheme of the Government to provide a well developed colony to meet the genuine requirements for residential plots of the people of Karnal. The plots were to be sold on 'first come first served basis' and the allotment of plots was to be made under the Punjab Urban Estate (Development and Regulation) Act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as 'Development Act'). In pursuance of that advertisement, the petitioners applied and were allotted the residential plots of different sizes at prices which varied according to the size of the plot and an allotment letter was also issued to the petitioners respectively (copy of one of such allotment letters attached with the petition is Annexure P.2). Condition No.4 in the allotment letter reads as under :- "The above price of the plot is subject to variation with reference to the actual measurement of the plot as well as in case of enhancement of compensation of acquisition cost of land of this sector by the Court or otherwise and you shall have to pay this additional price of the plot, if any, as determined by the Department within 30 days from the date of demand." It is further averred that Government acquired the land measuring 338.74 acres for the purpose of setting up the aforementioned Urban Estate at Karnal under the Land Acquisition Act. The award was announced by the Land Acquisition Collector on 23rd November, 1973. Some of the landowners filed references under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act claiming enhancement in the amount of compensation and all these references were decided by the Tribunal at Karnal between the year 1979 and 1980. The compensation was enhanced to Rs. 22/- per square yard vide these awards. It is next averred that the Government created Haryana Urban Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'HUDA") by an Ordinance, which was substituted by an Act called The Haryana Urban Development Authority Act (Haryana Act No. 13 of 1977). Notices were received by the petitioners (copy of one of such notices attached with the petition is Annexure P-3) intimating the plot holders that in order to meet the enhanced cost of land, the price of the plots had been revised. The price in the case of Krishan Kumar Chawla petitioner was revised from Rs 37/- to Rs 45/- per square yard. There was enhancement in all cases, the quantum per square yard varying with the number of instalments in which the total amount was paid. Feeling aggrieved from this enhancement, some of the plot holders filed writ petitions and one of such writ petitions was Civil Writ Petition No. 3217 of 1977, which was ultimately dismissed along with other petitions on 22nd July, 1981. Thereafter, HUDA issued yet another demand notice in April, 1981 to each of the plot/house owners in Sector 13 of the Urban Estate Karnal. This demand notice briefly referred to condition No. 4 in the allotment letter and further stated that the enhanced compensation of the Sector had since been deposited in the Court for payment to the concerned parties and the same was recoverable from the plot holders. The matter did not rest there as another notice in July 1984 was issued to the petitioners and other plot holders in which again, after making reference to condition No.4, it is stated that enhanced compensation of the Sector had since been deposited in the Court for payment to the concerned parties and that each of the plot holder was to pay at the rate of Rs 46.74 per square yard to meet the cost of enhanced compensation. Copy of one of such notices is attached with the petition as Annexure P-5. The petitioners were perturbed on the receipt of this notice and accordingly filed a common representation through the Welfare Association of the residents of Sector 13 as well as Sector 13 (Extension). But no heed was paid to the representation and instead another notice was issued (copy of one of such notices is Annexure P-7) partially modifying notice Annexure P-5, in which it is stated that on re-calculation the amount payable comes to Rs. 37.71 per square yard instead of Rs. 46.74 per square yard and requiring the petitioners to pay the said amount by means of a demand draft in favour of the Estate Officer, Karnal, payable at Karnal, within thirty days of the date of issue of the notice, failing which action for the imposition of penalty and resumption of plot in accordance with the provisions of section 17 of the HUDA Act read with Regulation 12 of the Haryana Urban Development Authority (Disposal of Land and Buildings) Regulations, 1978, would be taken. The petitioners have called in question the legality of the notice Annexure P-7 through this petition, inter alia, on the grounds that no enhancement whatsoever, in the amount of compensation by any Court took place after 22nd October, 1980, that already an additional price at the rate of Rs. 10.67 per square yard in April 1981 had been demanded, that respondent No. 2 cannot now turn round and say that more amount is payable to meet the enhanced cost of compensation, that the proceedings regarding compensation having attained judicial finality in the year 1980, the enhanced compensation cannot be asked for after such an inordinate delay, that the respondents had taken a plea in the earlier petition that according to the policy of the department the residential plots were allotted to the persons on the basis of 'No Profit No Loss Basis' but by issuing the present impugned demand notice the respondents are not taking into account the huge profits made by them from the transactions to which reference is made in clause (viii) of ground No. 22, that a total area of 29.5 acres was reserved to be utilised as a green belt, but the respondents have given up this green belt and have started a commercial Nursery which is purely a commercial activity, with the result that the cost incurred in relation to that land must be reduced from the total cost and that the action of the respondents in demanding the enhanced price on the face of it is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. Notice of motion was issued by the Bench on 13th March, 1985. In response to the notice, written statement on behalf of respondents Nos. 1 to 3 has been filed by the Administrator, HUDA, dated 19th April, 1985, in which besides taking certain preliminary objections, the material allegations made in the petition have been controverted. It is not necessary to refer to the preliminary objections as they were not pressed at the time of the arguments. On merits, it is averred that when initially price of the plots in dispute was fixed, the award of the Collector had not been made and an approximate cost of Rs. 15,000/- per acre was assumed as the tentative price of the land. Later on, the Land Acquisition Collector assessed the price of the acquired land at Rs. 29,980/- per acre, which necessitated the revising of the tentative price, which was done on a consideration expressly stipulated in the regulations. Initially, the price had been fixed at Rs. 33/-, Rs. 35/- and Rs. 37/- respectively for the three categories and the tentative price was revised to Rs. 43/- Rs. 44/- and Rs. 45/- respectively. The petitioners are under a contractual obligation to pay the additional price. The demand notice at Annexure P-4 is legal and valid. The compensation had been enhanced from time to time by the District Courts. The amount of enhanced compensation has to be deposited in the Court as per the judicial orders, to be recovered from the plot holders. The averment of the petitioners that no order for enhancement were passed after 22nd October, 1980 has been denied and it is averred that the references were decided by the District Judge from time to time which increased the amount of compensation every time. The latest case No. 89/4 of 1983 was decided on 29th September, 1983. It is further averred that on the receipt of the common representation from the Welfare Association of Sector 13, an opportunity of hearing was afforded to the representatives of the Association. The matter was discussed with the representatives in detail. The calculations were got checked by the respondents. On recalculation it was ordered that recovery at the rate of Rs. 37.75 per square yard instead of Rs. 46.75 per square yard be made. In para 20, a detailed statement showing the date of enhanced compensation of Sector 13 and 13 (Extension) per square yard has been given. The respondents are legally entitled to recover the additional price at the rate of Rs 37.75 per square yard. It is also stated that HUDA has stepped into the shoes of the Urban Estates Department and the impugned notice can legally be issued by HUDA and the same is neither arbitrary nor offends the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution. A supplementary written statement dated 6th August, 1985 was filed, in which it is stated that a sum of Rs 2,12,63,442.69 is such for which awards were announced after 1st April, 1981 but its amount could not be included while calculating the recovery of enhanced compensation at the time of the issue of notice as mentioned in Annexure P.4. This amount was deposited on 1st April, 1981, and as such was recoverable from the plot holders. To this outstanding amount was also added the amount totalling Rs. 72,45,046.37 for which the awards were announced after 1st April, 1981 onwards and were deposited from time to time. Besides, the interest payable and the miscellaneous expenses were added when final notices as contained in Annexure P-5 were issued on 15th July, 1984 and revised vide Annexure P-7. During the course of arguments, certain clarification was needed and the respondents were required to file another affidavit which was filed on 31st March, 1986, in which it is stated that for the purpose of calculation of additional price the incidence on account of commercial area is not chargeable to the plot holders. Any amount payable on account of enhanced compensation of the commercial area is debited to HUDA and is taken outside the purview of the calculations made for determining the additional price payable by the plot holders as is clear from the statement of account attached with the additional written statement filed. It is also averred that wherever an area gets shown as "Undetermined use" in as it happened in case of Sector 14, Gurgaon (which is presently maintained as an open space) the land use may not be changed and the area will not be utilised for any other purpose till the plan is modified and approved by the State Government. It is next averred that payment of enhanced compensation is made by HUDA out of its own resources and no assistance from the State Government or financial institutions is available to the organisation for this purpose. Since the amount is to be subsequently recovered from the allottees over a period of time, it becomes difficult to make the payment immediately after the announcement of enhanced amount of compensation by the District Courts/ High Court. The investigation made by HUDA towards the payment of enhanced compensation from its own resources further strains the commitment or development works in other areas. Consequently, a certain amount of delay in the payment of enhanced compensation is inevitable. After issue of recovery notices to the allottees the actual recovery from the plot holders takes a long time, whereas the investment has already been made by the authorities. The interest of 7/10 per cent, as the case may be, for the period intervening between deposit of compensation and issue of notice to the allottees is a reasonable charge as if it is an instalment of the amount due from the plot holders. If HUDA were to raise resources from the financial institutions, a much higher rate of interest would be charged which would mean an additional burden on the plot holders. As in the case additional compensation, which becomes payable to the right holders from the date of the taking over the possession, this additional price also becomes payable from that date itself. This is how the pleadings of the parties stand.
(2.) It was contended by Mr. Kuldip Singh, Senior Advocate, whose contention was adopted by the other learned counsel that after 3rd April, 1981, no enhancement in compensation has been made and as such no enhancement amount could be claimed from the petitioners on the pretext that the enhanced amount of compensation payable to the landowners was deposited late. We are afraid we are unable to agree with this submission of the learned counsel. Condition No.4, which has been reproduced in the earlier part of the judgment, clearly provides that the price of the plot is subject to variation with reference to the actual measurement of the plot, as well as in case of enhancement of compensation of acquisition cost of land of this Sector by the Court or otherwise. As it transpires from the reading of the various affidavits filed by the Administrator, what has actually happened is that some awards enhancing the amount of compensation were made prior to 1st April, 1981, but the amount of compensation could not be deposited in Court, with the result that such amount till its deposit could not be included while calculating the recovery of enhanced price. Further, the plea that no award enhancing compensation was given after 1st April, 1981, is incorrect as in the affidavit dated 6th August, 1985, it has been specifically averred that the awards for the amount totalling Rs. 72,45,046.37 were announced after 1st April, 1981. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the calculation for demanding the enhanced amount of additional price was made only after HUDA had deposited the amount of compensation and it is on the basis of that calculation that the impugned notice, Annexure P.7, was issued to the plot holders. In reply to para 20, the Administrator in his written statement dated 19th April, 1985, has given complete chart showing figures on the basis of which calculation for enhanced amount of additional price for Rs. 37.75 has been made. For facility of reference the same is being reproduced hereunder :- Statement showing the data of enhanced compensation of Sector 13 and 13 Extension, per Sq. Yd. Total amount payable by Haryana Urban Development Authority upto 31.10.83. Interest upto 31.3.84 @ 7% P.A. Total Rs. 3,56,54,565-44 50,14,905-00 4,06,69,470-44 Rs. 5,20,146-25 93,578-80 6,13,725-05 3,61,74,711-69 51,08,483-80 4,12,83,195-49 Therefore the total amount of enhanced compensation which is recoverable. Rs. 4,12,83,195-49 Balance already recovered. Rs. 73,03,568-00 Balance amount yet to be recovered. Rs. 3,39,79,627-49 Less interest recovered in excess. 14,91,145-00 2. Total land. 338.74 Acres 3. Enhanced compensation per gross acre. Rs. 95,909-78 4. (i) Area falling in Sector 14. 25.31 Acres. (ii) Area under shopping centre. 5.31 Acres. (iii) Area of 50% of Sec. dividing roads of Sector 12&13 3.00 Acres. (iv) Other area Haryana Urban Development Authority residence vacant land under Kutia etc. 6.16 Acres. (v) Area under institutions 11.13 Acres. Total 50.91 5. Compensation to be charged to Sector 14 & other for 50.91 acres as 'A' above. Rs. 48,82,766-80 6. Balance amount including the recoverable amount from Haryana Housing Board. Rs. 2,76,05,715-69 7. Plotable area of - (i) Sector 13 and 13 Extension. 132.20 Acres. (ii) Plotable are of Haryana Housing Board. 20.09 Acres. Total plotable area 152.29 acres or 7,37,084 sq.yd. Therefore the rate of enhanced compensation from the plot holders of Sector 13 & 13 Extn. and Haryana Housing Board Rs. 37.45 per sq.yd. Less excess charged. Rs. 1.72 per sq.yd. Net Rs. 35.73 per sq.yd. Rate of interest @ 7% 1.4.84 to 15.1.85 1.98 per sq.yd. Rs 37.71 per sq.yd.
(3.) Under clause (4) of the agreement, the petitioners are legally bound to pay the enhanced amount of additional price demanded from them. Under this clause, HUDA has an absolute right to revise the price of the plot on the basis of the enhancement of compensation. Merely this fact that there has been some delay in depositing the amount of compensation in the Court by HUDA, it cannot be a valid ground to invalidate the demand made from the petitioners for the enhanced amount of additional price. The amount of enhanced compensation has been actually paid by HUDA and its burden must fall on all the plot holders. The contention of the learned counsel, as earlier observed, has no merit.;