JUDGMENT Mukul Mudgal, C.J.(Oral) - This writ petition has been filed for challenging the extension fee being demanded by respondent No. 2 on account of non commencement of production. 2. Plot No. C-130, Phase VIII, Eltop, SAS Nagar, Mohali was allotted to Sh. Jagdeep Singh, Director of the petitioner Company. The allotment letter did not provide for charging extension fees. The plot was subsequently leased to the petitioner company by a supplementary lease agreement dated 18.04.1984. The Registration Certificate certifying commencement of production was issued on 08.02.1997 certifying date of commencement of production as 24.01.1985. This writ petition challenges the orders dated. 15.11.2006, 27.02.2007, 20.09.2007 and 01.12.2008 respectively (Annexures P7, P10, P11 and P13) demanding extension fee from the petitioner. The challenge of the petitioner is based upon the averments that the petitioner had been issued a registration certificate dated 08.02.1999 by the Department of Industries which also specified the date of commencement of production as 24.01.1985. The levy of extension fee against the petitioner was based on a notification dated 02.09.2005 (Annexure P8). A perusal of the aforesaid notification shows that it applies to all the existing and new areas either fully developed/semi- developed for industrial purposes and the relevant portion, of the said policy reads as follows :- "The allotment policy would be applicable to all the existing and new areas either fully developed/semi-developed for industrial purposes as focal points, growth centre, industrial areas, industrial estates etc. by any agency of the government. Extension in Time & Fee: In case allottee fails to bring up the industrial unit into production on the industrial land allotted under this policy within 03 years, he/they will have to seek extension in time period for bringing up unit into production failing which allotment made shall be deemed to have been cancelled. Extension in time period shall be granted on payment of extension fee @ 1% per year of current reserve price of the land fixed by the developing agency in the concerned focal point/industrial estate operative at the time of making payment. This shall also apply to all the allotment of plots made so far effective from the expiry of last permissible period. This shall also apply to all the allotment of plots made so far effective from the expiry of last permissible period. In the event of an applicant failing to bring the unit into production within prescribed/extended period, the allotment of plot shall be liable to be cancelled consequent upon which amount equivalent to the earnest money deposited and extension fee, if any, paid/payable shall stand forfeited. The remaining amount shall be refunded to the allottee on which no interest shall be payable by the developing agency. Provided that this transfer policy shall be applicable to all the industrial plots allotted by any developing agency under all the previous policies as well." 3. A perusal of the above extracts of the policy clearly demonstrates that the extension fee was to apply in respect of the industrial land allotted under the said policy dated 02.09.2005 and for seeking extension in time period for bringing up units of production failing which the allotment would be deemed to be cancelled. The said notification also provided that exemption could be granted on payment of extension fee @ 1% per year on current reserve price of the land. The Counsel for the petitioner submits that this policy is not applicable to the petitioner because the registration certificate issued as far back as on 08.02.1999 demonstrates the commencement of production w:e.f. 24.01.1985. The petitioner has also pointed out this registration certificate and the effect thereof to the respondents in his earlier communications. The petitioners representation dated 31.07.2008 in fact clarified to the respondents that the extension fee was not leviable on them as the petitioner had commenced production from 24.01.1.985 and reliance was placed on the following statement published in The Tribune dated 01.09.1987 :- "Today we are attaching a policy regarding "concessions to.the allottees of industrial plots in various focal points developed by PSIEC". This policy/notification was published in the form of advertisement in The Tribune dated 01.10.97 (photocopy is attached for your kind information). And this clearly states......" the allottees of plots whose allotments were made on or before 31.03.1987 and 30.06.97 onwards and have commenced production on the plots upto 21.07.94 and 30.06.97 respectively are required to submit proof of having undergone production in the shape of permanent registration certificate issued by General Manager, District Industries Centre concerned. And this clearly states......" the allottees of plots whose allotments were made on or before 31.03.1987 and 30.06.97 onwards and have commenced production on the plots upto 21.07.94 and 30.06.97 respectively are required to submit proof of having undergone production in the shape of permanent registration certificate issued by General Manager, District Industries Centre concerned. No extension fee in such cases is leviable." This clearly proves that there has been some mistake in your demand. We would like to go through it, as we feel it not that justified after 23 years you make such a demand when all industries in Punjab are given time till 1994." 4. Relying upon the above publication it is stated that as per the respondents own stand no extension fee was leviable where the permanent registration certificate existed on the date of the notification. Learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 urged that since the industrial unit had not been built upto 23.01.1985, therefore, the extension fee was sought to be levied. 5. In view of the registration certificate issued by the Government of Punjab, Department of Industries on 08.02.1999 wherein it is said that the commencement of production was from 21.04.1985 and the above advertisement published in The Tribune on 01.09.1987, we are satisfied that the notification dated 02.09.2005 does not apply to the petitioner notwithstanding the statement in the said notification that the transfer policy was applicable to all the industrial plots allotted by any developing agency under the previous policy. We are not concerned with the transfer policy but with the extension fee only. 6. Accordingly, the Civil Writ Petition stands allowed and the orders dated 15.11.2006, 27.02.2007, 20.09.2007 and 01.12.2008 respectively (Annexures P7, P10, P11 and, P13) demanding extension fee are quashed and set aside. 7. Since the petitioner under the impugned orders seeking extension fees had deposited a sum of Rs. 1 lac, the respondents shall refund the said amount to the petitioner not later than eight weeks from today. Petition allowed.