To,

1. The Haryana State Industrial And Infrastructure Development

Corporation Ltd. through its Managing Director, Registered and
Corporate Officer C-13-14, Sector -6 Panchkula.

2. Estate Manager, the Haryana State Industrial And Infrastructure

Development Corporation Ltd., Kundli District Sonepat..

Subject: Reply to the demand notice dated 29\4.05.2019 for payment

of enhanced cost in respect of Plot/Shed No. 352-353,
Sector-57/ Phase IV, Industrial Estate Kundli District
Sonepat.

Respected Sir,

The applicant respectfully submits as under:-

1. That Plot No. 352-357 Sector 57, Phase IV Industrial Estate Kundli

District Sonepat, measuring 3600 Sq.Mtrs was originally allotted in the

name of M/s ……………. vide regular letter of allotment dated

04.07.2000. Later on vide letter dated 29.04.2010, Constitution of allottee

was changed to a Private Ltd. Company M/s ……………………..

2. That after payment of entire price as per the regular letter of

allotment as well as the other requisite charges, conveyance deed dated

…………….. was executed in favour of M/s ……………………...

3. That vide notice dated 29.09.2017, noticee No.2 has called upon the

allottee for payment of enhanced cost @ Rs. 2,270/- Per Sq. Mtr. Along

with the demand notice a calculation sheet has been given wherein the
total demand has been bifurcated in 10 equal installments of principle

amount, caring half yearly interest thereupon @ 12%.

4. That 428.769 acres of land was acquired for development of Phase

IV Industrial Estate Kundli District Sonepat vide notifications dated

05.08.1997 and 29.07.1998 issued under Section 4 and 6 of the Land

Acquisition Act. Award no.1 dated 15.12.1998 was passed by the Land

Acquisition Collector, assessing market value @ Rs. 4,50,000/- Per acre

up to the depth of 4 acre from national high way No.1 and @ Rs.

2,25,000/- Per acre for the remaining land.

5. That on reference Under Section 18, the Ld. Reference Court

assessed market value @ Rs. 6,00,000/- Per Acre for land situated up to 4

acres from National Highway No.1 and 4,00,000/- per acre for the

remaining land. The Hon’ble High Court in regular first appeal assessed

compensation @ Rs. 20,00,000/- per acre for the land abutting G.T. Road

up to the depth of 880 feet and Rs. 14,00,000/- per acre for the remaining

land, vide Judgment dated 21.11.2016. The Hon’ble Supreme Court

dismissed the SLP vide decision dated 07.07.2017.

6. That the demand notice dated 29.09.2017 is liable to be

recalled/withdrawn on the following grounds:-

a) In the impugned notice no details have been mentioned as to

how the figure of Rs.2,270 as demanded has been arrived at.

Neither any details have been mentioned about salable area

as industrial plots, commercial plots nor the details of the

amount paid by HSIIDC as total compensation amount to the

land owners has been given. In the absence of any such

 details it cannot be made out as to how the amount demanded

is being claimed.

b) That no details has been mentioned as to how much owners

filed reference under Section 18, appeal under Section 54

before the Hon’ble High Court and the SLP. Even no details

have been given as to on which dates enhanced compensation

awarded by different courts as well as the Land Acquisition

Collector was disbursed. No details have been given as to

how much amount has been paid towards principle and how

much has been paid towards interest on the delayed payment

of compensation amount. These details are very much

essential as the component of interest given by HSIIDC to

the land owners towards compensation on account of

unreasonable delay cannot be recovered from the plot holders

as a part of enhancement.

c) That the allotment of plots in Phase. IV Industrial Estate

Kundli started in the year 2000 @ Rs. 1,500 Per Sq. Mtr and

with the passage of time it has now gone up to Rs. 13,000/-

Per Sq. Mtr. It is relevant to submit here that during all these

years, allotment has remained a continuous process and even

as on today number of Industrial plots/sheds are yet to be

allotted.

d) That it is necessary to submit here that no details have been

given as to whether all the land owners filed reference under

section 18 of the Act or RFAs were filed pertaining to entire

 land under acquisition. It is further necessary to submit here

that only in few cases, review applications were filed by the

landowners, meaning thereby the calculation made by

HSIIDC by presuming that for the entire acquired land, a

uniform compensation @ Rs.2,00,000/- per acre and Rs.

14,00,000/- was paid, is wrong, illegal and perverse.

e) That vide notice under reply the applicant has been asked to

pay 15% interest in case the enhanced price is to be paid in

seven equal installments. No reference of any provision

under the Haryana Urban Development (Disposal of Land

and Building) Regulation, 1978, has been made while

demanding such an exorbitant rate of interest.

f) That huge area being utilized for Effluent Treatment Plant,

Water Works and Police Post, etc. has not been taken into

consideration while making calculations. Once the individual

plot holders including the applicant, are being charged

against the above mentioned services, separately, the price of

land being used for Effluent Treatment Plant and Water

Works, is required to be contributed by the respective

Government Department and the burden against the same

cannot be fastened upon the applicant as well as the other plot

holders. Meaning thereby that the allotment has been made

at the rate of more than three times of the market value

awarded to the land owners, meaning thereby that the effect

of enhancement, if any, to be awarded at any appropriate

 stage, has already been taken care of while fixing the price of

allotment.

g) That the statutory interest on every enhancement has been

calculated upto 31.3.2017, which is wrong, as interest @

15% per annum has to be paid till the date of actual payment

made to the land owners. Firstly, no such date has been

mentioned about the payment having been made to the land

owners, secondly, if at all payment has been made on

31.3.2017, the plot holders cannot be made liable to share the

burden of interest and it has to be borne by the HUDA.

h) That the above mentioned issues/objections are being raised

by the applicant on the basis of whatever information i.e.

available with the applicant. However, the applicant reserves

his right to submit additional objections in case he is

provided with the following material information relating to

the acquisition proceedings as well as fixation of market

value of the acquired land:-

(i) Policy to calculate the additional price arrived at

along with Agenda of meeting of HSIIDC.

(ii) How many land owners of i.e. phase IV Kundli,

filed reference under section 18, Regular First

Appeals, under section 54 of the Land Acquisition

Act, before the Hon’ble High Court, and review

thereafter. Separate details in number regarding all

the three categories be provided along with their

 extent of land in above said respective proceedings

separately.

(iii) How much amount as compensation has been paid

by HSIIDC to the land owners and on what dates?

Kindly give the details date wise.

(iv) How much amount till date has been collected/

received from the plot holders of i.e. Phase IV

Kundli, Distt. Sonipat, against the allotment of

plots/sheds, details be kindly given on financial

year basis.

(v) How much amount has been collected by HUDA

from plot holders of i.e. Phase IV Kundli, Distt.

Sonipat against transfer fee, delayed interest,

extension fee and other Misc. charges? Details be

kindly given date wise.

(vi) Detail be given as to at what rate the original

allotment of plots i.e. Phase IV Kundli, Distt.

Sonipat was made and in which year. Further

details be provided as to whether the rate of

allotment of plot was increased from time to time.

In case the price of allotment was increased with

the passage of time, details be provided year wise.

(vii) The total development cost spent by HSIIDC i.e.

Phase IV Kundli, Distt. Sonipat be provided.

 (viii) At what rate the area earmarked for public and

semi-public building as well as shopping centre/

convenient shopping has been allotted.

(ix) Details be given as to how much area remains to be

allotted with HSIIDC out of the total area of i.e.

Phase IV Kundli, Distt. Sonipat.

(x) How much amount is yet to be recovered from the

present allottees of i.e. Phase IV Kundli, Distt.

Sonipat.

i) That the notice issued by your office is in violation of settled

law expounded by the Hon’ble High Court in case titled as

Smt. Nisha Vs. State of Punjab, reported as 2001 (4) R.C.R.

(Civil) page 40. The detailed and comprehensive directions

issued by the Hon’ble High Court in the above mentioned

case have not been followed by your office before raising the

demand. Relevant paragraph No.9 of the above mentioned

judgment is reproduced hereunder for kind reference:-

“9. In view of what we have mentioned above and the

decisions rendered in Surinder Singh’s case (supra)

and Harbinder Bajwa’s case (supra), we dispose of

these writ petitions with the following directions:

(1) Within two months from today the respondent-

Corporation shall furnish to each of the petitioners

the details of calculations made for arriving at the

 figure of enhanced price chargeable from the

petitioners in respect of the land allotted to them.

Along with the calculations, full particulars of the

judgment/award under which the enhanced

compensation had been paid or is payable by the

Corporation should be disclosed to the petitioners;

(2) Within seven days of the receipt of calculations

from the Corporation, the petitioners may make

written application for inspection of the relevant

records and the competent authority of the

Corporation shall allow inspection of the records to

the applicants within next three weeks;

(3) The petitioners shall be entitled to file

representation questioning the correctness of the

calculations made by the Corporation and at the

same time they shall be entitled to make a prayer

for the grant of benefit of rebate/incentive and land

subsidy in accordance with the letters of intent.

The petitioners shall be free to raise other points

including the plea of estoppels against the charging

of enhanced price. Such representations shall be

made within a period of three months from the date

of receipt of the calculations;

(4) If any of the petitioners makes a written request

for the grant of opportunity of personal hearing

 then the competent authority of the respondent-

Corporation shall hear such petitioners after giving

a notice of the date, time and place for such

hearing;

(5) After hearing the petitioners, the competent

authority of the respondent-Corporation shall pass

a speaking order indicating its reasons for

accepting or non-accepting their claim with regard

to payment of the enhanced additional price/

enhanced costs, rebate/incentive and land subsidy;

and

(6) The order passed by the Corporation shall be

communicated to individual petitioner, requiring

him/her/them to pay the additional price, if any,

along with interest payable as per the policy of the

Corporation prevalent on the relevant date.”

Specific direction issued by the Hon’ble High Court in

the above mentioned case enjoin your office to follow

a particular procedure of associating the plot holders

before raising any such demand, which has been

totally ignored in the present case.

In view of the facts and circumstances narrated above, the applicant

hereby calls upon your office to withdraw the notice/demand under reply

as not being based on any empirical data as well as the demand having

been raised without providing details to the applicant.

 Applicant
…………………………………
…………………………………………
…………………………………………
……………………………………...