Gurvinder Singh Ghai vs. State Of Chhattisgarh

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition by directing respondents 2 and 3 to consider and decide the petitioner's representation seeking waiver of interest during the pandemic period. The petitioner was also granted the liberty to make a fresh representation. The authorities were directed to take an appropriate decision within 90 days from the receipt of the order. While deciding, the respondents were advised to consider earlier instructions and circulars issued by the Department regarding the grant of relaxation and rebate. The Court did not make a specific finding on whether the petitioner was entitled to the waiver, but rather directed the authorities to consider the representation. The issue of GST was mentioned as outstanding but not specifically addressed in the operative part of the order.

Facts

The petitioner, Gurvinder Singh Ghai, filed a writ petition seeking a direction for respondents 2 and 3 (Raipur Development Authority and its Revenue Officer) to consider his representation for waiving interest during the COVID-19 pandemic period. The petitioner had paid the principal amount for allotted land but faced difficulties in making regular payments due to the pandemic's impact. He had paid the entire amount except for some interest, surcharge, and GST. The petitioner sought a rebate in interest for the pandemic period and had already approached the authorities without a decision. Respondents 2 and 3 argued that any relaxation on interest payment must be a policy decision and cannot be granted individually.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a waiver or rebate of interest on land allotment dues during the COVID-19 pandemic period, considering the impact of the pandemic on his ability to make timely payments? 2. Whether the respondents 2 and 3 are obligated to consider the petitioner's representation for waiving interest during the pandemic period, and if so, what is the scope of their discretion? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that due to the COVID-19 pandemic, he was unable to make payments regularly and sought a rebate in interest for the period affected by the pandemic. He had already submitted a representation to the authorities. Respondents' Contention: The respondents 2 and 3 contended that any decision regarding relaxation of interest payments must be taken as a policy decision by the authorities and cannot be made in isolation for an individual petitioner.