2006 INSC 1119
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                                              Ram Chandra Srivastava
                                                           Vs

                                          Chairman, D.D.A and Another

   Appeal (Civil) 5146 of 2006 (Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 9685 of 2005)

                                     (S. B. Sinha and Markandeya Katju, JJ)

                                                      22.11.2006
                                                    JUDGMENT

MARKANDEY KATJU, J.
Leave granted.
This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 11.2.205 of the Division
Bench of Delhi High Court in LPA No. 1045/2004 of CWP No. 62 of 2004.
Heard the appellant in-person and Mr. V.B. Saharya, learned counsel for the DDA.
The impugned judgment states as under:
" This appeal is preferred against the order made by learned single Judge in W.P.(C) No. 62/2004
on 28.9.2004. Learned single Judge has examined the aspect of property tax which has no concern
with the services provided by the Delhi Development Authority. About the ground rent the learned
single Judge has taken into consideration the facts and the explanation put forth by the respondents
and the accounting practice was found to be not unscientific. In this view of the matter, we would
not like to interfere. Hence the appeal is dismissed".

In our opinion the impugned judgment is a cryptic judgment, and with due respect to the Division
bench we feel that the matter in dispute has not been considered by it properly. In particular, we are
of the opinion that the Division Bench should have carefully considered whether the service charge
levied by the DDA was valid, considering the fact that service charge is a fee and not a tax and
hence there should be a broad co-relation (though not an exact co-relation) between the total service
charges levied by the DDA and the value of the services provided to the citizens.

The Division Bench also should have considered in detail the appellant's grievance regarding the
ground rent.

In that view of the matter, the impugned judgment dated 11.2.2005 is set aside and the matter is
remanded to the Division Bench for a fresh decision after hearing the parties, in accordance with
law. The Division Bench is requested to give a more detailed judgment dealing with the matter in
issue, and dealing with the contentions of the appellant.

The appeal is allowed. No costs.