Impersonal & Irresponsible Attitude Of Officers Putting Everything To Court: SC Imposes ₹1 Lakh Cost On Haryana Urban Development Authority
The Supreme Court while dealing with a case has imposed a cost of Rs. 1 lakh on the appellants saying that it is because of the impersonal and irresponsible attitude of the officers, who want to put everything to Court and shirk to take decisions.
The two-Judge Bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Rajesh Bindal said, “In the case in hand, the civil suit was filed on 1.10.2003 by the Respondent challenging the demand of additional price. Judgment of this Court in Sanjay Gera’s case was delivered on 22.02.2005. Despite this fact being in knowledge of the Appellants, the suit was contested and the same was decreed on 19.08.2008. The matter did not end here, appeal was preferred by the appellant before the First Appellate Court and on failure even before the High Court and thereafter before this Court. For the aforesaid reasons and wasting the time of the Courts at different levels, we deem it appropriate to burden the Appellants with cost of ₹1,00,000/- to be deposited with the Supreme Court Mediation Centre.”
The Bench held that in addition, the respondent having been dragged in unnecessary litigation up to the Apex Court deserves to be awarded a cost of Rs. 50,000/-.
Advocates Samar Vijay Singh and Keshav Mittal appeared for the appellants while Advocate Revathy Raghavan appeared for the respondent.
In this case, the appellants had challenged the order passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court whereby the dispute pertained to the demand for additional price for the allotment of a plot to the respondent. A notice was issued to the respondent by the appellants raising demand for additional price as well as to show cause as to why the plot should not be resumed on account of non-construction within a period of two years of allotment.
The aforesaid notice was followed by subsequent notices and then a civil suit was filed by the respondent challenging the demand raised by the appellants. The same was decreed and aggrieved by the same, the appellants filed an appeal which was dismissed by the lower Appellate Court and thereafter, the appellants did not succeed even before the High Court.
The Supreme Court in view of the facts and circumstances of the case asserted, “The additional amount sought to be recovered from the Respondent was ₹26,880/- to which there was no justification even at the stage of issuance of notice. The suit was decreed on 19.08.2008. The amount spent on litigation would be much more. It is because of impersonal and irresponsible attitude of the officers, who want to put everything to Court and shirk to take decisions. However, still the Appellants had not only filed appeals, resulting in addition to the pendency of cases and also must have spent huge amount on litigation in the form of fee of the counsels and allied expenses.”
The Court further noted that a number of officers/officials must have visited the counsel engaged at Chandigarh, when the matter was taken up in the High Court and thereafter to the Apex Court when the order was challenged before it.
“Even that amount also needs to be calculated and recovered from the guilty officers who, despite there being judgment of this Court, dealing with the same issue opined the case to be fit for filing appeals”, also said the Court.
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the appeal and directed the appellants to deposit the amount and do payment to the respondent within two months.
Cause Title- Haryana Urban Development Authority & Anr. v. Jagdeep Singh
