Relief for Power Grid as high court scraps HSVP’s Rs 93.12-cr claim

In a significant government-versus-government legal dispute, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed a demand of Rs 93.12 crore raised by the Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran (HSVP) against the Power Grid Corporation of India Limited (PGCIL).

Allowing the writ petition filed by PGCIL, the Division Bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Vikas Suri also directed HSVP to issue a “no dues certificate” to the corporation. The PSU had approached the court through senior advocate Akshay Bhan and advocate Aman Bansal, seeking the cancellation of the demand towards extension fee, enhancement charges, and service tax.

The petitioner further sought the approval of a building plan submitted in December 2017 and requested that the period from 2011 until the resolution of the dispute be treated as a “zero period” for the purpose of extension fee calculation, attributing the delay to administrative lapses by the authorities.

During the hearing, the Bench was informed that land in Faridabad had been allotted to PGCIL by HUDA (now HSVP) in 1996 for constructing staff quarters and office space. However, the construction process saw repeated delays due to procedural and administrative challenges commonly faced by government undertakings.

Despite submitting repeated requests for extension of time and paying applicable dues, HUDA issued multiple show-cause and resumption notices under the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, citing non-construction as the reason.

The petitioner explained that the delays were administrative and sought regularisation. HUDA, however, resumed the land in 2012. The PSU appealed, and the Chief Administrator ruled in its favour, recognising that the delay was beyond the corporation’s control.

In 2013, HUDA introduced a policy allowing the regularisation of resumed plots upon payment of extension fee. Despite this, the petitioner faced persistent delays in receiving accurate calculations of the fee. The high court later intervened and directed HUDA to communicate the exact dues. In response, HUDA informed the petitioner in 2016 of the payable amount, and the PSU subsequently deposited over Rs 4 crore.

Construction work was assigned in December 2016, but the HSVP neither approved the building plans nor processed further extensions. Instead, in May 2017, HSVP raised a fresh demand of Rs 93.12 crore, comprising extension fee, enhancement charges, and service tax.

Contesting the demand, the PSU alleged that it was “inflated and unjustified” and blamed the authority for the delays between 2011 and 2016. The petitioner approached the high court once again, leading to the formation of a multi-member committee to examine the issue.

Referring to its earlier order and acknowledging that Rs 4.09 crore had already been paid, the high court observed that HSVP had no authority to reopen a matter already settled. It also accepted the argument that the period of delay should be considered as a “zero period” owing to inaction by the authority.

The Bench finally ruled in favour of PGCIL, quashed the Rs 93.12 crore demand, and directed HSVP to issue a “No Dues Certificate” to the petitioner.

Haryana Tribune