HC quashes HUDA’s Rs 93.12 crore demand against Power Grid Corporation of India Limited

In a government-versus-government dispute, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed a Rs 93.12 crore demand raised by the Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran (HSVP) against Power Grid Corporation of India Limited (PGCIL).

Advertisement

Allowing the writ petition filed by the corporation, the Bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri also directed the HSVP to issue a no dues certificate to PGCIL. It had moved the High Court through senior advocate Akshay Bhan with Aman Bansal seeking the cancellation of the Rs 93.12 crore demand raised by the HSVP towards extension fees, enhancement charges, and service tax.

Directions were also sought for issuance of a no dues certificate on the ground that all dues stood already paid. Approve a building plan submitted in December 2017 was also sought, along with directions to treat period from 2011 until case resolution as a "zero period" for extension fee calculation, due to delays by the authorities.

The Bench during the course of hearing was told that the petitioner, a government organisation, was allotted land in Faridabad by the HUDA (now HSVP) for building staff quarters and office spaces starting in 1996. Over the years, the petitioner faced delays in construction due to procedural and administrative requirements typical for a government body.

Despite repeated requests for extension of time and payment of applicable fees, the HUDA issued multiple show-cause and resumption notices under the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act for non-construction.

The petitioner explained delays and sought extensions, but the HUDA resumed the land in 2012. Acting on its appealed, the Chief Administrator ruled in its favour, acknowledging the delays were beyond the petitioner's control.

The HUDA, meanwhile, issued a policy in 2013 stating that the resumed plots for non-construction should be regularised upon payment of extension fees. The petitioner repeatedly requested calculation and communication of extension fees but faced inaction. Eventually, the High Court directed HUDA to inform the petitioner of the dues based on the prior order. The HUDA, in 2016, informed the petitioner of the extension fees due, following which the petitioner paid over Rs 4 crore in compliance.

The petitioner in December 2016 assigned construction work for the residential complex. But the HUDA failed to approve the building plans and raised Rs 93.12 crore demand as extension fee, enhancement, and service tax in May 2017. The petitioner, in turn, contested it as inflated and unjust, blaming the HUDA for delays from 2011 to 2016.

The petitioner approached the High Court, resulting in the formation of a multi-member committee. Referring to a 2016 order, the petitioner submitted that it had already paid Rs 4.09 crore and claimed that the delay period should be treated as a “zero period” due to HUDA’s inaction. The High Court agreed, ruling that the HUDA had no power to review the settled matter, quashing the Rs 93.12 crore demand and ordering issuance of a no dues certificate.