Parshotam Lal & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Ors.
Background
The appellants challenged how much of their money was forfeited by the state authorities when they surrendered plots that had been allotted to them, arguing the Revisional/Appellate Authority's discretion in fixing the forfeiture percentage was being applied inconsistently. Noting that there was no uniform approach being followed, the Court had earlier directed the state to explain why the appellants could not be given treatment similar to another case (Annexure P6) where a lower forfeiture rate had been applied.
Decision Breakdown
The State accepted that forfeiture percentages can reasonably vary case to case under the governing statute, but the Supreme Court held that, on the specific facts of this case, fairness required treating the appellants the same way as the comparable Annexure P6 case. The Court allowed the appeals and directed that the forfeiture percentage applicable to the appellants be reduced to 2%, while expressly clarifying that this direction was based on the peculiar facts of this case and should not be treated as a general precedent for other forfeiture disputes.
Lesson Learnt
Even where the law allows authorities some discretion (such as fixing a forfeiture percentage), a citizen can seek relief where similarly placed people were treated more favourably, but courts may limit such relief strictly to the facts at hand rather than laying down a rule for future cases.