The Chhattisgarh High Court has dismissed a writ petition that sought a refund of money deposited for the allotment of commercial plots. The court stated that the dispute arising from the contractual allotment could not be resolved within the writ jurisdiction.
The situation started when the Raipur Development Authority introduced a new commercial project called the “Devendra Nagar Commercial Complex Scheme” in Cloth Market, Pandri, Raipur, back in 2018. The project was promoted with the promise that the land was clear of any legal issues and suitable for businesses to set up shop.
In accordance with the outlined terms, the petitioners submitted applications for commercial plots and were successfully allocated three plots, specifically designated as Plot Nos. 9, 10, and 11. Each of these plots spans an area of 750 square feet. Following the conditions set forth in the tender, the petitioners fulfilled their financial obligation by depositing 25% of the total tender amount. Each petitioner contributed a significant sum of Rs. 24,38,000, which collectively amounted to an impressive total of Rs. 73,14,000 for all three plots.
Thereafter, the applicants obtained a notice citing that 18% GST was to be paid on the allotment amount. GST was not specified in the tender document or advertisement; the applicants stated and thereafter contested the demand before the HC earlier, but those petitions were dismissed in July 2023.
After the same, the petitioners stated that the scheme had regulatory defects because the part of the land included canal or water body land, which cannot be utilised for commercial development. The authority attempted to modify the layout plan and asked for approval from the State Government, but the proposals were denied in 2019, 2020, and 2022.
The applicant mentioned that without an approved layout plan, the plots could be legally registered or developed. They directed the authority for a fresh approved layout or a refund of the deposited money. When there was no answer, they submitted the present writ petition asking for Rs 73,14,000 with interest.
Read Also: Bombay HC Clarifies GST Not Applicable on MIDC Plot Transfers to Third Parties
The respondents said that the dispute has emerged from a contractual relationship between the petitioners and the development authority, and the same claims for refund could not be determined in writ jurisdiction.
The division bench of Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal stated that the relationship between the parties emerges from a tender-cum-allotment procedure, and the refund claim of the money is a matter of contractual rights.
The Court specified that determining the claim shall need examination of disputed facts, which could not be accomplished in proceedings under Article 226. The High Court, concerning such findings, dismissed the writ petition and permitted the petitioners to approach the competent civil court or another relevant forum for relief.
| Case Title | Shobha Choudhary vs State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary |
| Case No. | WPC No. 910 of 2026 |
| For Petitioner | Mr. Rajeev Shrivastava |
| For Respondent | Mr. Praveen Das |
| Chhattisgarh High Court | Read Order |
