Angoori Devi And ANR. v. Punjab State Agricultural Marketing Board And ORS.

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 3.8.2016 Angoori Devi and another ....Petitioners.

Versus

Punjab State Agricultural Marketing Board, Punjab and others

...Respondents.

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN.

PRESENT: Mr. L.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioners. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.

1.

Through the instant petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondent No.2 to refund the sale consideration (bid amount) of Plot No.560, New Grain Market, Mansa which is over and above the amount ordered to be forfeited and to pay interest @ 15% per annum against the delayed payment. 2.

On 6.12.2010, an auction was conducted in Mandi Mansa for sale of plots. The petitioners participated in the said auction and being highest bidders were allotted plot/grain shop No. 560, measuring 8.3 x 40.41⁄2 square feet for the sale consideration of ` 30,25,000/-. They deposited 25% of the bid amount, i.e. ` 7,56,250/- and allotment letter dated 27.12.2010 (Annexure P-1) was issued in their favour. The petitioners paid the remaining 75% bid amount along with interest vide cheques/receipts

-2- (Annexure P-2 Colly). Thereafter, the petitioners moved an application dated 1.6.2015 along with self-declaration (Annexure P-3 Colly) to respondent No.2 for allowing them to commence with the business of cloth merchant from the said shop. Respondent No.2 vide letter dated 15.6.2015 (Annexure P-4) referring to condition No.9 of the allotment letter, called upon the petitioners to show cause within seven days regarding their request for starting the business of cloth merchant from the said shop. The petitioners filed reply to the said show cause notice. Respondent No.2 vide order dated 3.7.2015 (Annexure P-5) ordered for resumption of the plot in question and directed respondent No.3 to take possession of the plot from the petitioners under intimation to respondent No.2 regarding the same.

In compliance with the order, Annexure P-5, the petitioners handed over the possession of the plot to respondent No.3 vide letter dated 13.7.2015 (Annexure P-6) who sent official intimation to respondent No.2 vide letter dated 13.7.2015 (Annexure P-7). Thereafter, the petitioners vide letter dated 1.1.2016 (Annexure P-8) requested respondent No.2 for refunding the amount of sale consideration after making necessary deductions. When no action was taken thereon, the petitioners sent a reminder dated 18.1.2016 (Annexure P-9), but to no effect. Respondent No.2 vide letter dated 4.2.2016 (Annexure P-10) made an offer to the petitioners to retain the plot in question. The petitioners rejected the said offer vide letter dated 6.2.2016 (Annexure P-11) and requested for refund of the amount.

Thereafter, the petitioners served a legal notice dated 5.5.2016 (Annexure P-12) upon respondent No.2 for refund of the amount of remaining sale consideration along with interest @ 15% per annum calculated from 3.7.2015 onwards, but no response has been received till date. Hence, the present writ petition.

-33.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that for the relief claimed in the writ petition, the petitioners have sent a legal notice dated 5.5.2016 (Annexure P-12) to respondent No.2, but no action has so far been taken thereon.

4.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, perusing the present petition and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we dispose of the present petition by directing respondent No.2 to take a decision on the legal notice dated 5.5.2016 (Annexure P-12), in accordance with law by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. It is further directed that in case the petitioners are found entitled to the amount of interest, the same be released to them within next one month, in accordance with law. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE August 3, 2016 (RAMENDRA JAIN) gbs JUDGE Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No