M.M.KUMAR,J - (1.) THIS petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenges demand notice dated 14.3.2003 (P-10), raising demand of Rs. 3,72,625/- on account of dues upto 30.4.2003 in respect of allotment of House No. MIG-162, Dugri Road, Ludhiana in place of House No. HB-77, Dugri Road, Ludhiana, as well as order dated 3.11.2006 (P-18), passed by the Additional Chief Administrator-respondent No. 2, rejecting the appeal of the petitioner for waiving off the penalty/penal interest imposed by the Estate Officer- respondent No. 3. A further prayer has been made for directing the respondents to hand over possession of dwelling unit No. HB-162, Dugri Road, Ludhiana.
(2.) FACTS of the case may first be noticed. The Punjab Housing Development Board (for short, 'PHDB'), now Punjab Urban Development Authority (for brevity, 'PUDA') floated a house allotment scheme, namely, MIG-168 Scheme for allotment of houses on Hire-Purchase basis at Ludhiana. The petitioner being successful was allotted Dwelling Unit No. 77 (First Floor), Dugri Road, Ludhiana, vide allotment letter dated 25.9.1991 (P-1). As per clause 2 of the letter of allotment the total tentative price of the dwelling unit was Rs. 1,43,500/-. The petitioner had already paid a sum of Rs. 2,000/- towards earnest money and he was required to pay Rs. 35,455/- before taking possession of the dwelling unit. The remaining amount was to be paid in 156 monthly installments of Rs.1,505/- each or the entire tentative cost could be paid within a period of 60 days from the date of issuance of allotment letter without payment of interest. As per clause 3 of the allotment letter after deposit of the payable amount with the Divisional Engineer/Asstt. Engineer, Ludhiana, the possession could be taken from him within 30 days from the date of issuance of allotment letter failing which allotment was liable to be cancelled and the allottee was liable to pay charges and penalty as per the terms and conditions laid down in the Annexure attached with the allotment letter. It is apposite to mention here that the aforementioned allotment was to be governed by the provisions of the Punjab Housing Development Board Act, 1972 (for brevity 'the Act') and the rules and regulations framed thereunder from time to time. The allottee was also required to abide by the provisions of the Punjab Urban Estates (Development and Regulations) Act, 1964 (for brevity 'the 1964 Act') and the rules and regulations framed thereunder from time to time. On 22.10.1991, the petitioner paid a sum of Rs. 35,455/- vide Demand Draft No. 499852 (P-2). The possession of Dwelling Unit No. 77 (First Floor), Dugri Road, Ludhiana, complete in all respects including Civil, Public Health and Electrical Fittings was handed over by the Sub Divisional Engineer of the then Punjab Housing Development Board, Ludhiana, to the petitioner on 11.1991 (P- 3). The petitioner has, however, claimed that only symbolic possession of the aforementioned dwelling unit was given and the physical possession could not be handed over because of existence of a police post there. He immediately on the same date i.e. 11.11.1991 apprised the Divisional Engineer, PHDB, Ludhiana, about existence of a police post at House No. 77-FF, Dugri Road, Ludhiana and requested that possession of the same be handed over to him (P- 4). On 10.1.1992, the petitioner again made another representation to the Assistant Manager (Estate), PHDB, Ludhiana, for handing over of vacant physical possession of the aforementioned dwelling unit (P-5). On 30.3.2000/10.4.2000, the petitioner made a request to the Chief Administrator, PUDA, for allotment of alternative dwelling unit because still the police post was in existence in Dwelling Unit No. 77-FF, Dugri Road, Ludhiana (P-6). By that time i.e. upto 10.10.1996 the petitioner had deposited an amount of Rs. 63,440/- with the respondents, as is evident from perusal of Annexure P-24. On 2.6.2003, the petitioner again reiterated his requested for allotment of alternative dwelling unit (P-7). Even thereafter also the petitioner sent letters on 23.6.2000 (P-20), 19.10.2000 (P-21), 29.11.2000 (P-22) and 27.5.2002 (P-23), however, no action was taken.
(3.) ON 3.6.2002 (P-19), the Sub Divisional Engineer (Bill), PUDA, Ludhiana, sent his report to the Estate Officer-respondent No. 3 to the following effect : "It is intimated in respect of the above referred subject that plot No. 77 is lying vacant. But there is a police post below this house. The passage for going to house No. 77 is through the police post which is inconvenient for a common man. In the same locality House No. 162 MIG is lying vacant. It is recommended that House No. 162 MIG may be allotted in place of House No. 77. By doing so, PUDA will not suffer any kind of loss." On 5.6.2002, the Additional Chief Administrator, PUDA, Ludhiana-respondent No. 2, ordered that House No. 162 MIG, Dugri Road, Ludhiana, be allotted to the petitioner in lieu of Dwelling Unit No. 77 (First Floor), Dugri Road, Ludhiana (P-8). When physical possession of the alternative site was not handed over to the petitioner by the Estate Officer-respondent No. 3, he made yet another representation on 4.7.2002 (P-9). The Estate Officer-respondent No. 3, instead of handing over physical possession of the alternative site, issued a demand notice dated 14.3.2003, asking the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs. 3,72,625 on account dues upto 30.4.2003 so that further action could be taken (P-10). The aforementioned amount includes 121 instalments upto 30.4.2003, difference of price and penal interest, with the following break up, as is evident from letter dated 5.4.2004, written by respondent No. 3 to respondent No. 2 (P-11) :- i) 121 instalments upto 30.4.2003 @ Rs. 1505/- Rs. 1,82,105/- ii) Difference of price Rs. 9,100/- iii) Penal interest Rs. 1,81,420/- As a matter of fact, on receipt of demand notice, the petitioner protested about charging of instalments and penal interest from the date of allotment of original dwelling unit i.e. 77 (First Floor), Dugri Road, Ludhiana. In this context the Estate Officer-respondent No. 3 has written a letter dated 5.4.2004, to the Additional Chief Administrator-respondent No. 2, giving aforementioned detail of the dues (P-11). ;