Sunil Kumar Dhariwal And Ors vs. The Chd Adm. Chd And Ors

Facts

The petitioners, who are allottees of taxi stands in Chandigarh, approached the High Court seeking permission to pay outstanding amounts, including ground rent, interest, and GST, in installments and to have their sealed taxi stand premises de-sealed. The respondents, represented by the State, submitted calculations of the dues owed by each petitioner, totaling Rs. 45,77,744/-. The respondents noted that the petitioners had previously been granted an installment payment facility but failed to adhere to it, arguing they did not deserve further indulgence. The petitioners contended that taxis are their sole source of livelihood and expressed their intention to clear the dues, requesting a revised installment plan.

Held

The Court decided to grant the petitioners one last opportunity to clear their outstanding dues, considering that their taxis are their sole source of livelihood. The Court directed the petitioners to deposit 50% of their total outstanding dues within two weeks from the date of the order. Upon this payment, the State/competent authority was directed to de-seal the taxi stand premises and hand them over to the respective petitioners. The remaining balance of the outstanding dues was to be paid by the petitioners on or before October 31, 2024. The Court emphasized that the petitioners must abide by their undertaking. The Court also stated that if the petitioners failed to deposit the first installment or the complete balance amount within the stipulated periods, the respondents would be at liberty to take over the premises of the taxi stands. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioners should be granted a further opportunity to pay their outstanding dues in installments, considering their previous failure to adhere to an installment plan? 2. Whether the sealed taxi stand premises of the petitioners should be de-sealed upon payment of a portion of the outstanding dues? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioners argued that their taxis are their primary source of income and they are willing to clear their dues. They proposed paying half of the outstanding amount within two weeks and the remaining balance within three months thereafter. They also undertook to make timely future payments. Revenue/State's Arguments: The respondents submitted that the petitioners had already been granted an installment facility by the concerned authorities but failed to comply with it. Therefore, they argued that the petitioners are not entitled to any further leniency.