Gurcharan Singh vs State of Punjab

M.S. Liberhan, J.—Petitioner was allotted a plot of 400 Sq. yards on 19.3.1987 at the provisional price of Rs. 93,000/. The respondents

vide letter dated 28.10.1992 claimed the price of the said plot at Rs. 3,12,000/ fixed by the State Government. The respondents claim the rest of

the amount. Similar notices were issued to various allottees, who preferred the writ petitions challenging the enhanced price. This Court vide D.B.

judgment in CWP No. 13283 of 1991 decided on 28.9.1992 (AIR 1993 P & H 54), came to the conclusion that the respondents could not

enhance the price of the plot. It is only in case of enhancement held by Land Acquisition Collector or the proceedings for enhancement of

compensation, if the compensation is enhanced, the price can be enhanced to the extent of enhancement of compensation.

A pari materia question on same facts arose when similar notice was under challenge in LPA 346 of 1994 decided on 21.1.1995 wherein it was

laid down that the respondents cannot enhance the price of the plot. Enhancement of the price fixed was quashed on the ground that there was no

justification in the circumstances for enhancement of the price of the plot. Similar view was taken by this Court in case of D.S. Laungia and others

v. State of Punjab etc., AIR 1993 Punjab and Haryana 54. The respondents went in appeals to the Supreme Court which were later on dismissed

as withdrawn.

The Hon''ble Supreme Court lucidly and explicitly in case of Preeta Singh etc. v. Haryana Urban Development Authority, JT 1996(5) SC 634,

held that respondents are given the right to enhance the price, once the plot has been allotted on the tentative/provisional price as is the case in

hand. The price can be fixed by the authority and approved by the State Government as it has been done in the present case. It is as contractual

obligation between the parties on which allottee has been allotted the plot. The abovereferred judgment and the withdrawal of the appeal by the

respondents has resulted in anomalous situation i.e. in the same claim the allottee will be getting plots at the tentative price and no enhancement can

be done, while in case of the law laid down by the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the abovereferred judgment, the respondents would be entitled to

claim enhanced price. We are bound by the judgment of Hon''ble Supreme Court as it is being the law of land, though the net result would be that

the similarly situated persons would be treated differently. It is within the jurisdiction of the respondents to deal with the similarly situated persons

and we have no doubt that the State will be fair enough to all. In view of the law laid by the Hon''ble Supreme Court and judgments in LPA as well

in CWP cannot be followed.

In view of the observations made above, writ petitions are dismissed.

Petitions dismissed.