HC quashes Rs 5 lakh conversion charges demand

New Delhi, July 30 (UNI) The Delhi High Court quashed Delhi Development Authority's (DDA) demand of Rs five lakh as misuse charges, for conversion of a property in Naraina Vihar from lease hold to freehold on the grounds that it could not demand the amount after 18 years.

The court, in its judgement passed on Thursday, observed that it would be arbitrary and unreasonable for DDA to seek or levy misuse charges after a gap of 18 years after the misuse was stopped.

Justice Dr S Muralidhar said there is no reason why the conduct of the DDA should be condoned and it should be permitted to collect the misuse charges after a gap of 18 years.

Justice Muralidhar said DDA should exercise its powers within a reasonable time. Delay of 18 years cannot be termed as reasonable, the court observed.

Mrs Rattan Kaur, a resident of F-97, Narayana Vihar, had filed a writ petition in the Court seeking quashing of demand of Rs five lakhs raised by DDA as misuse charges which was levied 18 years ago.

The property was purchased by Mrs Kaur's late husband in 1974. In one of the rooms, a typing institute by the name of Modern Commercial College was being run.

On August 28, 1975, DDA issued them a notice to discontinue the commercial use of the premises. The petitioner closed the institute.

Thereafter, no notice was served to the petitioner by DDA.

The completion certificate was granted to the petitioner on December 19, 1978.

On March 17, 1979, DDA inspected the site and found that the misuse had been stopped two or three months back.

On May 5, 1995, the petitioner approached DDA to convert his property from lease hold to free hold, following which more inspection were carried out.

In the report, however, all that the DDA inspector could write was ''the owner states there was a typing institute since 1975 which continued till 1979, thereafter it was closed.'' The officer further wrote that ''if agreed, we may recover the misuse charges from March 1, 1975 to January 15, 1988 against the area of misuse, that is, 120 sq ft.'' DDA later assumed that the period of misuse was September 1, 1974 to May 5, 1995 and a letter was issued to the petitioner on May 9, 2001 demanding Rs 5,08,387 as misuse charges. The DDA directed the petitioner to deposit the entire amount within 15 days, else their lease would be cancelled.

Mrs Kaur's counsel, Madhu Tewatia, told the court that each of the show cause notices issued by DDA were vague and that the room was not being used commercially but only being used for consultation work.

Meanwhile, counsel for DDA, Sangeeta Chandra, submitted that they have calculated the misuse charges on the basis of the circular issued by the Ministry of Urban Affairs (Land and Developement Office).

The court observed that the only period the DDA has been able to establish for the purpose of misuse charges is between October 11, 1974 to February 1979 and no further. Therefore, it is arbitrary and unreasonable for DDA to make such a demand after 18 years.

The Court further levied Rs five thousand on DDA as costs to be paid to the petitioner. The court also issued stringent directions to DDA to decide on the petitioner's application for conversion in accordance with law, without demanding past misuse charges. The Court has also directed DDA to inform about the progress within a period of eight weeks.

The court also ensured that if there is any other legal impediment to grant the conversion, necessary documentation for conversion of property to freehold must be completed within a further period of another four weeks thereafter.

UNI