M. KATJU AND S. L. SARAF, JJ.

( 1 ) THE petitioner is a retired District Judge, who retired on 31. 1. 1995. While he was in service, he applied for allotment of a house under the Indlrapuram Scheme at Ghazlabad and he paid all the instalments but the property was not allotted to him. Most of the amount which the petitioner deposited has been refunded to him but he has claimed Interest on the deposits.

( 2 ) LEARNED counsel for the respondent has stated that in view of para 10. 40 of the scheme, no interest is payable. However, learned counsel for the petitioner has rightly contended that para 10. 40 will apply only if the petitioner surrenders the property under para 10. 30 of the scheme. He has alleged that the petitioner never surrendered the property rather he wrote a letter to the respondent asking them to give him possession of the house or else refund the money. In our opinion, this does not amount to surrender as the petitioner had not given up his claim. Hence in our opinion the provision in para 10. 40 of the scheme that no interest will be payable has no application.

( 3 ) MOREOVER, in our opinion, clause 10. 40 of the scheme which provides that no Interest shall be payab

Click Here to Read the rest of this document