M/S Asian Paints Ltd v. State Of Haryana And ANR

CWP-2367-2018 -1HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-2367-2018 Date of Decision: February 05, 2018 M/s Asian Paints Limited .....Petitioner

Versus

The State of Haryana and another ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEKHER DHAWAN 1.

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

Yes/No 2.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No.

3.

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes/No .......

Present:

Mr.Akshay Bhan, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Vikas Kuthiala, Advocate for the petitioner. ........

SURYA KANT, J.

The petitioner-Company was allotted industrial plot No.1 in Industrial Estate, IMT, Rohtak by Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation (for brevity,'the HSIIDC') vide allotment letter dated 24.08.2007. The petitioner appears to have paid the allotment price. However, the petitioner has now been slapped with the impugned Notice dated 02.11.2017 asking it to deposit the enhanced cost of allotment to the tune of approximately `15.00 crores. It is averred in the Notice that the revised cost has been calculated keeping in view the enhancement in compensation of the acquired land by Courts.

[2] One of the major grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is that the impugned Notice is totally cryptic as it does not furnish Meenu 2018.02.09 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh

CWP-2367-2018 -2statement of accounts as to how the enhanced cost has been calculated or levied on the petitioner.

[3] In the light of the above-stated plea taken by the petitioner, the instant writ petition is disposed of with a direction to HSIIDC to furnish the complete details including statement of account to justify the enhanced cost sought to be recovered from the petitioner. Let such details be furnished within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and if petitioner finds any discrepancy therein, it shall be at liberty to represent against the same. The representation, if any, shall be considered by the HSIIDC in accordance with its Policy and law, as early as possible but not later than two months from its receipt. ( SURYA KANT ) JUDGE February 05, 2018 ( SHEKHER DHAWAN ) meenuss JUDGE 1.

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No 2.

Whether reportable ?

Yes/No Meenu 2018.02.09 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document chandigarh