1
12 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.2912/2006.
Harak Chand Malpali & Anr. Vs. State & Anr.
Date of Order :: 23rd September 2008.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI
Mr. D.D. Chitlangi for
Mr. J.P. Joshi, for the petitioners.
Mr. Dron Kaushik, for the respondent No.2.
.....
BY THE COURT:
Learned counsel for the parties are ad idem that the
controversy as involved in this writ petition stands practically
covered by the decision of this Court in a batch of petitions led
by S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3419/2005 (Manoj Kumar & Anr.
Vs. State & Anr.) decided on 03.03.2008; and that this writ
petition may be disposed of in the light of the said order except
with necessary modifications about the schedule of payment
and execution of work.
The controversy had been regarding demand of external
development charges by the respondent Urban Improvement
Trust, Sriganganagar (UIT) @ Rs. 50/- square metre with
reference to the Notifications dated 01.01.2002 and
15.01.2002 as issued by the State Government in its Urban
Development Department. The petitioners have challenged
such demand as being unauthorised and unjustified. This
Court, while deciding the said batch of petitions, has found
2
such levy of external development charges to be justified and
has held that the said petitioners and other similarly situated
persons who have developed the colonies cannot be
absolved of their liability to pay such external development
charges merely on the ground that they have sold off the plots
of land in question that was converted from agricultural to
residential purposes.
This Court proceeded to decide the said batch of
petitions with the following order and directions:
“Accordingly this writ petition is disposed of
with a direction to the petitioners to deposit the
aforesaid external Development Charges at the rate
of Rs. 50/- per sq. meter of the area of the colony
developed by them as notified to them by the
impugned demand notices by the respondent – UIT
within a period of 3 months from today i.e. on or
before 31st May 2008. The respondent UIT,
Sriganganagar is also expected and bound to
undertake such external Development works within
the stipulated time frame. A period of six months is
allowed to them from the date when such money is
deposited which is required to be deposited within
three months from today as already stated above i.e.
on or before 31.5.2008. If such external Development
charges are not deposited by any particular
petitioners or colonizers as aforesaid, the respondent
– UIT shall be free to proceed in accordance with law
for cancellation of regularisation or conversion of
agricultural into residential area and cancel the pattas
if already issued. If said money is deposited as
aforesaid, the respondent – UIT is directed to
undertake the requisite development works of Link
roads, sewerage lines etc. within a period of six
months from the end of May, 2008. If such work is
not undertaken and completed on or before
30.11.2008, upon an appropriate application filed in
this regard, this Court may consider fixing of
responsibility on the officers concerned of the
respondent – UIT, Sri Ganganagar. If the external
Development Charges are deposited by the
petitioners, the respondent – UIT will also consider
3and issue appropriate patta in favour of the persons
to whom the plots have been allotted and sold by the
petitioners.”
Thus, essentially the challenge as put by the said
petitioners to such development charges was not sustained;
and, following the decision aforesaid, similar challenge in the
present writ petition cannot be sustained either; and, therefore,
this writ petition is required to be, and is, dismissed but with
the similar nature directions with the modification herein that
the petitioners shall deposit the amount of external
development charges as per demand notice dated 05.05.2005
(Annex. 3) within a period of three months from today, i.e., on
or before 23.12.2008 and, on the petitioners’ making such
deposit, the respondent – UIT would be bound to take and
complete such external development works within six months
of such deposit, i.e., on or before 23.06.2009. Obviously, the
other directions in the aforesaid order dated 03.03.2008 would
also apply and if such external Development charges are not
deposited by petitioner, the respondent – UIT shall be free to
proceed in accordance with law for cancellation of
regularisation or conversion of agricultural into residential area
and cancel the pattas, if already issued. However, after
making deposit by the petitioners, if the works would not be
undertaken or completed before the stipulated time, upon an
appropriate application filed in that regard, this Court would
4
consider fixing of responsibility on the officers concerned of
the respondent – UIT; and, of course, the respondent UIT
would issue appropriate patta in favour of the persons to
whom the plots have been allotted and sold by the petitioners.
There shall be no order as to costs.
(DINESH MAHESHWARI), J.
Mohan/