JUDGMENT :

A.S. BOPANNA, J.

Delay condoned.

I.A. No. 159570/2019 is allowed.

1. Leave granted in both matters.

2. The common issue arising for consideration in these appeals is with regard to the claim for payment of interest on refund of the amount which had been deposited by the appellants with the respondent-Delhi Development Authority to avail the benefit of the construction based on additional FAR. The appellants in both these appeals are charitable institutions. The respondent through the notification dated 10.10.2008 issued in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 57 of the Delhi Development Act, 1957 had notified the fixation of rates to be applied for use conversion, mixed land use and other charges for enhanced FAR arising out of MPD 2021. In respect of the institutional plots also, the additional FAR charges were provided therein.

3. The appellant in the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 31548 of 2014 had assailed the said notification insofar as an imposition of the additional FAR charges, in W.P. (C) No. 3099 of 2010 before the High Court. The appellant in Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 2009 of 2015 had assailed the same, in W.P. (C) No. 2823 of 2010 before the High Court of Delhi. In the said writ petitions, application seeking interim orders had been moved. Towards consideration of the said application for grant of interim relief to permit sanction of Revised Plan so as to enable construction and completion, the appellants offered to deposit the disputed amount being the amount demanded towards additional FAR charges which had been assailed in the writ petition. The High Court having accepted the suggestion permitted the appellant to pay the said amount and avail the benefit. The appellants having deposited, availed the benefit and proceeded with the construction.

4. During the pendency of the writ petition, the respondent issued a notification dated 17.07.2012 whereby an amendment was made in Para 6(g) to the notification dated 10.10.2008 and 23.12.2008 which were assailed before the High Court. By such amendment, it was provided that no additional FAR charges would be recovered from Educational Societies/Health Care and Social Welfare Societies having Income Tax Exemption. The said benefit became available to the appellants herein and as such the writ petitions pending before the High Court did not warrant an adjudication on the disputed questions. Therefore, the High Court in all the writ petitions which were pending before it had taken note of the change made through the subsequent notification and had accordingly disposed of the analogous matters in W.P. (C) No. 8572 of 2009 and other petitions through the order dated 20.07.2012. In the said proceedings the deposit which had been made either before the High Court or by way of bank guarantees were permitted to be withdrawn.

5. In that background the writ petitions filed by the appellants herein before the High Court were also disposed of. We take note of the order dated 31.10.2013 in the case of the appellant in first of the appeals herein, whereby the High Court having extracted the earlier order had disposed of the writ petition. Insofar as the amount deposited with the respondent, it was directed that the refund be made within the period of eight weeks but the prayer for payment of interest was declined. It is in that light the appellant is before this Court.

6. At this juncture it is relevant to note that in the case relating to appellant in the second of the appeals herein, the writ petition in W.P. (C) No. 2823 of 2010 had been disposed of in similar terms through the order dated 27.08.2012 and the deposited amount was directed to be released. In that view, an application was taken out by the said appellant herein on the aspect relating to interest and had sought refund of the amount with the interest at 15% per annum. The High Court having considered the matter was of the opinion that since the writ petitions were not ultimately adjudicate