JDA directed to refund amount minus earnest money
Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Sept 21: High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed a petition challenging cancellation of allotment of shops by the Jammu Development Authority (JDA) as no legal ground was pleaded while questioning the impugned orders.
The petitioners—Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, Rita Sharma, Capt Madan Mohan Sharma and Ranjana Sharma, all residents of Tara Vihar, Paloura applied for the allotment of shop sites in response to the advertisement notice issued by the JDA.
Accepting the offer of the petitioners, the JDA issued allotment orders in favour of the petitioners for the shops in Paloura Phase-II. While one petitioner deposited whole premium amount, the rest of the petitioners could not desposit the premium well in time in conformity with the terms and conditions of the allotment order. Thereafter, JDA issued orders of cancellation of their allotments, which were challenged by the petitioners.
After hearing counsels for both the sides, Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal observed, “insofar as the request of the petitioners for depositing the balance amount is concerned, the same cannot be accepted at this belated stage as the same would be contrary to the terms and conditions of the allotment orders”.
“It is an admitted case of the petitioners that they could not deposit the premium within the time frame in conformity with the terms and conditions of allotment orders due to non-avoidable circumstances which have not been pleaded by them in the instant petition”, High Court said, adding “the record reveals that the respondents issued a fresh advertisement notice for re-auctioning the shops in question which have been allotted to the petitioners and there is no specific challenge to this advertisement notice in the instant petition”.
“No legal ground has been urged or pleaded by the petitioners which could be made basis for calling in question the orders impugned and in absence of any such foundation in the writ petition, the same is not maintainable being devoid of any merit deserves dismissal. Even, the petitioners have not sought any relief challenging the fresh advertisement notice which renders the instant petition not maintainable”, High Court said.
Although one of the petitioners has deposited the earnest money and subsequently also deposited 50% of the amount with the respondents followed by one more installment belatedly, he as per his own showing has deposited the balance amount much after the time prescribed in the letter of intent and as a consequent of the non-deposit of the premium amount within time-frame will entail the cancellation of the allotment/letter of intent issued in his favour, High Court said.
With these observations, High Court dismissed the petition for being bereft of any merit. However, JDA has been directed to refund the petitioner No.1 an amount to the tune of Rs 75000 plus Rs 66,000 (minus the earnest money) in case the same is lying with them and has not been paid to the petitioner, within a period of two weeks.
Follow our WhatsApp channel
