M/S Dhawan Processors v. State Of Punjab And Another



IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-8552-2024 Date of decision: 19.04.2024 M/s Dhawan Processors ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN PALLI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL

Present:

Mr. Shreenath A. Khemka, Advocate, for the petitioner.

**** ARUN PALLI, J. (Oral) A Certiorari is prayed for, to quash the demand notice dated 14.03.2024 (P-8), issued by Punjab Small Industries and Export Corporation Limited (respondent No.2), vide which, a demand of Rs.19,98,410/-, has been raised against the petitioner on account of enhanced land cost, with interest, as on 31.03.2024. And a Mandamus is also prayed for, to command the respondents to construct a Collective Effluent Treatment Plant at the site, that has been earmarked therefor, per advertisement dated 25.04.1993 (P-2).

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an industrial plot/site No.E-699, Industrial Focal Point, Phase VIII, Ludhiana, was allotted to M/s Jamna Udyog. Whereafter, the petitioner purchased the said site and the respondent-Corporation executed the lease deed dated 08.08.2011 (P-6), in its favour. Further, he submits that the site was allotted for the purpose of manufacturing, knitting, dyeing and processing of cloth and yarn. It is submitted that the limited grievance that the petitioner has is: vide impugned demand notice, the petitioner has been granted final extension to construct the site and commission the unit, by 30.09.2024. Further, it has been asked to ensure that payment of all







pending dues, as on 31.03.2024, are clear, failing which, the allotment shall be cancelled and the site shall be resumed. He asserts that although, the petitioner has already submitted a response/objection(s) dated 30.03.2024 (P-9) to the impugned notice, but apparently, the action of the Corporation is palpably erroneous and arbitrary. It is urged that earlier, the Corporation had raised a demand towards additional price of the allotted plot/site, owing to enhancement in the cost of acquisition, @ Rs.249/- per square yard in the year 2009, which was made good by its predecessor. Whereafter, even the petitioner had deposited the requisite amount, in terms of subsequent demand, i.e. @ Rs. 474/- per square yard, in the year 2022.

In reference to the decision dated 11.02.2010, rendered by this Court in CWP-2435-2010 (M/s Luxmi Caste Forge Vs. State of Punjab and others), he asserts that the impugned demand notice is in apparent violation of the said decision, and thus, is unsustainable. At any rate, it is urged that before finalizing the demand, the petitioner was not served with any notice or afforded an opportunity to submit objections. Therefore, interest/rights of the petitioner are severely impacted. 
 






   

 


 
  
 





  





   


  


  

 





 !

"

!
# 
$ 
%& 

 




  '

 


   



  !
   

 

 

 

( 


  




!





 

 

(  

 




  







 

(  

 
)  


 







 

   



 
 

 





 
!





 

 



*

 

 







 


 
 

 

 






 

!

 
    #  





   

 !
 

 
!! 

  
 






 



   







 









% 
 










  

  





  

  


 !



+ 
 


!

 



 



 

 
 
!

   
 

  

  
 




  

  !
  
 





 

(  

 
,








   


(

 
 
 





 
  

 







 

 


(  





 '!




   
  






 
(ARUN PALLI) JUDGE (VIKRAM AGGARWAL) JUDGE 19.04.2024 Ak Sharma -  
  !'   . -  



.',