The binding nature of contract terms and conditions, and the voluntary acceptance of the contract by the petitioner.

JUDGMENT

Harpreet Singh Brar, J. - Petitioner has approached this Court for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 13.09.2017 (Annexure P-10) passed by respondent No.1 along with order dated 19.10.2011 (Annexure P8) passed by respondent No. 2 and has further sought quashing of the order dated 01.11.2001 (Annexure P-6) passed by respondent No.4 vide which Booth No.71, Sector 16-A, Faridabad allotted to the petitioner was resumed on account of non-payment of the instalments towards the sale consideration within the stipulated period.

2. The brief facts of the case are that Booth No. 71, Sector 16-A, Faridabad was allotted in favour of petitioner on 11.01.1996 through open auction and as per terms and conditions of the allotment letter, 75% price of the site was required to be paid by the allottee in 10 half yearly instalments along with interest at the rate of 15% and the interest was to accrue from the date of offer of possession. The petitioner failed to make payment of instalments as per the terms and conditions of the allotment letter and after giving statutory notices, the site in question was resumed by the Estate Officer, HUDA, Faridabad vide order dated 11.01.2001. The petitioner filed appeal against the resumption order and vide order dated 19.10.2011 the same was dismissed by the Administrator, HUDA, Faridabad. The revision petition filed against the order dated 19.10.2011 was also dismissed on 13.09.2017.

3. We have heard counsel for the parties and have perused the impugned orders passed by the authorities below.

4. Learned Senior counsel representing the petitioner has argued that no notice under Section 17(1), (2), (3) and (4) of the HUDA Act, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) was ever served upon the petitioner by respondent No.1 and even the resumption order was passed at the back of the petitioner on 11.01.2001. He further argued that none of the impugned orders was ever served upon the petitioner. Therefore, the orders passed by the Appellate Authority and the Revisional Authority are illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice. Petitioner has further placed on record the death certificate of his mother dated 09.06.2016 as Annexure P-4 to indicate that he was unable to pay the instalments due to the illness and death of his mother on 17.10.2006. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has argued that the extreme power of resumption and forfeiture has to be applied as a last resort and action of the statutory authorities is required to be judged on the touch stone of Article 14 of the Constitution of India on the ground that the booths of similarly situated persons which were resumed in various sectors of Urban Estate, Faridabad, have been restored by respondent No.2 in appeal filed by the allottees. The reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Teri Oat Estates (P) Ltd. vs. State (UT of Chandigarh), 2004 (2) SCC 130 as well as the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jasbir Singh Bakshi vs. UT Chandigarh, 2004(10) SCC 440. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in Ajay Singh Mann vs. State of Haryana and others, 2009(1) RCR(Civil) 474.

5. On the other hand counsel representing respondents No. 2 to 4 has argued that the site was resumed vide order dated 11.01.2001 on the ground that after making the initial payment of 25% of the total price the petitioner has not made the payment of instalments as per the terms and conditions of the allotment letter (Annexure P-1). Learned counsel further rebutted the contention of the petitioner that notices under Section 17(1) to 17(4) of the Act were not served by referring to the order of the Revisional Authority (Annexure P-10) wherein it was clearly indicated that the notices were served on 18.05.1999, 31.07.2000 and 09.10.2000 due to non-paym