Page 1

JUDGMENT

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 5698-5699 OF 2009

State of Punjab and Others

…….Appellants

Versus

Dhanjit Singh Sandhu

…..Respondent

JUDGMENT

M.Y. EQBAL, J.:

1.

These appeals are directed against the judgment and

order dated 8.1.2009 passed by the Punjab & Haryana High

Court in C.W.P. No.8864 of 2007 and also order dated

27.3.2009 passed in Review Petition No. 112 of 2009,

whereby the writ petition filed by the respondent was

allowed and the order dated 23.12.2004 passed by

appellant no.3 rejecting the application for refund of the

extension fee received by the appellant in excess of the

Page 2

JUDGMENT

rates mentioned in Rule 13 of the Punjab Regional and Town

Planning and Development Act, 1995 (in short ‘1995 Act’) in

the light of the judgment passed in C.W.P. No.13648 of 1998

(Tehal Singh vs. State of Punjab & Ors.) along with up-

to-date interest has been set aside.

2.

The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass.

3. The respondent was allotted a plot of land measuring

400 square yards bearing No.2177 at Durgi Road, Urban

Estate Phase-II, Ludhiana vide allotment letter dated

1.4.1986. In terms of allotment, the respondent was

required to complete the construction of building within

three years from the date of issuance of the allotment letter

after getting the plans of the proposed building approved by

the competent Authority. The case of the respondent-writ

petitioner is that there was no condition in the allotment

letter for charging extension fee in the case of failure to

complete construction of the building within the

aforementioned period of three years nevertheless as per

2

Page 3

JUDGMENT

clause 15 of the allotment letter, the allotment was subject

to the provisions of Punjab Estates (Development and

Regulation Act), 1964 and the Rules and Policies framed

thereunder.

4.

It appears that in the year 1995, the State of Punjab

came with the legislation known as Punjab Regional and

Town Planning and Development Act, 1995 (in short ‘PUDA

Act’). By the said Act, the Punjab Urban Estate

(Development and Regulation) Act 1964 (in short ‘1964 Act’)

and Punjab Housing Development Board Act, 1972 were

repealed. In exercise of power conferred under the Act, the

State Government framed rules called the Punjab Regional

and Town Planning and Development (General) Rules 1995

(in short ‘1995 Rules’) which was published vide Notification

dated 22^nd August, 1995. Rule 13 of the Rules specified the

time within which the building is to be constructed. It also

provides for extension of time limit subject to payment of

prescribed fee mentioned therein.

3

Page 4

JUDGMENT

5. The Punjab Urban Planning and Development Authority

(in short ‘PUDA’) issued a circular dated 15.1.1998 revising

the rate of extension fee chargeable for the residential and

commercial plots and by the said circular a very high rate of

extension fee was proposed to be charged. The respondent

from time to time deposited the extension fee so demanded

by the appellant. It is alleged that an amount of Rs.1.20 lacs

has been in excess charged from the respondent. The

appellant’s case is that the appellant in an attempt to nullify

the effect of the judgment rendered in Tehal Singh’s case

and to validate the demand of enhanced rate of extension

fee purportedly framed the Rules called Punjab Regional and

Town Planning and Development

(General) Second

Amendment Rules, 2001 (in short ‘2001 Rules’) giving

retrospective effect.

6.

The respondent moved a writ petition being C.W.P. No.

7934 of 2004 praying inter alia for the directions to refund

4

Page 5

JUDGMENT

the excess fee charged from the respondent. It was

disposed of with the directions to the appellant to reconsider

the re