STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION CHANDIGARH CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. SC/4/CC/18/2024 SANJEEV KUMAR GARG PRESENT ADDRESS - FLAT NO. 103, TAJ TOWERS, SECTOR -104, SAS NAGAR, MOHALI ,CHANDIGARH.

.......Complainant(s)

Versus BATHINDA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY PRESENT ADDRESS - PUDA/BDA COMPLEX, BHAGU ROAD, PHASE-1, MODEL TOWN, BATHINDA ,CHANDIGARH.

.......Opposite Party(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MRS. PADMA PANDEY , PRESIDING MEMBER HON'BLE MR. PREETINDER SINGH , MEMBER FOR THE COMPLAINANT:

SANJEEV KUMAR GARG DATED: 15/05/2025

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T. CHANDIGARH [ADDL. BENCH] ============

Consumer Complaint No. : CC/18/2024

Date of Institution : 20/03/2024

Date of Decision : 15/05/2025

Sanjeev Kumar Garg son of Sh. Diwan Chand Garg, Resident of Flat Lyra, 103,

Taj Towers, Sector 104, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali.

…. Complainant Vs.

Bathinda Development Authority , PUDA/BDA Complex, Bhagu Road, Phase-I, Model Town, Bathinda – 151001, through Estate Officer.

…… Opposite Party BEFORE: PADMA PANDEY PRESIDING MEMBER PREETINDER SINGH MEMBER PRESENT : Sh. Harish Goyal, Advocate along with Ms. Roma Gill, Advocate for the Complainant.

: S/Sh. Ishtneet Bhatia and Bhupinder Singh, Advocates for the Opposite

Party.

PER PADMA PANDEY, PRESIDING MEMBER

Succinctly put, the material facts giving rise to the present Consumer Complaint are that

Opposite Party had allotted one Plot i.e. Plot No. 108, measuring 500 sq. yards at BDA Phase 4 & 5,

BDA Enclave in the name of the Complainant, possession whereof was offered on 05.11.2019, but was taken by him in the month of Jan. 2020. The Complainant got the construction of the house completed in December 2022, within time, as per rules and applied for completion certificate on 20.12.2022. However, the Complainant was informed on 27.01.2023 that his non-construction fee of ฀3,00,000/- was pending, upon which Complainant clarified that he was Punjab State Govt. Public Sector employee working as Superintendent Engineer in PSPCL and currently working on deputation as Joint Director at Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission, Sector 18, Chandigarh since 27.09.2018 and thus entitled to exemption from payment of said fee as per Rule 2(4) of the Punjab Govt. notification dated 16.04.2021 which provided that extension fee shall not be charged in case of the officers/ officials of the State Govt. and the Public Sector Undertakings of the State Govt. who were required to serve outside the State of Punjab in accordance with their service conditions. Thereafter, on 27.02.2023 the Complainant was informed that due to internal change from sanctioned map compounding fee of ฀45,325/- was to be deposited by him. The Complainant on 14.04.2023 gave clarification for the same that no violation has been made except for swapping of kitchen and bathroom at site which was intimated to the concerned office during construction but no communication was received till date and as per Section 14(3) of the Punjab Urban Planning and Development Building Rules, 2021, if nothing has been communication within the prescribed time frame, no clarification was required from his side. However, vide mail dated 30.05.2023, the Complainant was asked to pay non-construction fee balance of ฀24,600/- and compounding fee of ฀45,325/-. The Complainant submitted his due explanation vide letter dated 05.06.2023 with a request to provide completion certificate without any delay. The Complainant submitted that there had been complete lockdown in the entire country from March 2020 to May 2020, so benefit of at least three months should have been given to him in raising the construction. Further, the authorities have given moratorium for a period of six months and if that being so, then Complainant has completed the construction within the time limit. It has been alleged that the Opposite Party vide letter dated 30.09.2022 demanded ฀5,02,915/- in three installments on account of enhanced cost of land acquisition for paying to the land owners. Accordi