Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 843 (PNJ)

Raman Kumar Aggarwal v. State of Punjab

2020-03-03

LISA GILL

body2020
Judgment Mrs. Lisa Gill, J.:- Petitioner is aggrieved of order dated 28.02.2019 (Annexure P4) passed by the Deputy Controller (F&A), Punjab State Lotteries, Chandigarh. 2. Petitioner purchased a lottery ticket bearing No.A-334075 of the Punjab State Baisakhi Bumper 2018 for which the draw was held on 18.04.2018 and published on 25.04.2018. The petitioner staked a claim for the prize amount of Rs.10,00,000/- with the averment that the said prize amount was declared on the ticket purchased by him. Claim was submitted by him before the department on 24.12.2018. It is mentioned by the petitioner in his application dated 24.12.2018 (Annexure P3) that after purchasing the ticket, he had forgotten about the same and did not even check the result of the lottery. The ticket was not traceable. While searching for some other documents, the lottery ticket was traced out and the petitioner checked regarding the result of the same with the agent. Thereafter, he came to know that a prize of Rs.10,00,000/- has been declared on the said ticket. Petitioner, thus, prayed that delay in submission of the lottery ticket be condoned and the prize amount be disbursed to him. 3. The petitioner’s claim was rejected by the Deputy Controller (F&A), Punjab State Lotteries, Chandigarh vide impugned order dated 28.02.2019 on the ground of submission of the claim beyond the period as stipulated in the Punjab State Lotteries Rules, 2015 ( for short, ‘Rules 2015’). Aggrieved therefrom, the present writ petition has been filed. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a reasonable explanation has been given by the petitioner for condonation of delay in submission of the claim. Moreover, there is no applicable rule which provides for rejection of the petitioner’s claim only on the ground of limitation. It is further submitted that in any case Rule 11 of the Rules 2015 providing for the period within which the claim is to be submitted, is itself illegal and in contravention of the Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998. It is thus prayed that this writ petition be allowed. 5. Advance copy of this writ petition has been supplied to Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Abhaypal Singh Gill, AAG, Punjab who controverts the arguments as above. Dismissal of the writ petition is prayed for. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the file with their assistance. 7. 5. Advance copy of this writ petition has been supplied to Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Abhaypal Singh Gill, AAG, Punjab who controverts the arguments as above. Dismissal of the writ petition is prayed for. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the file with their assistance. 7. Insofar as the purchase of the lottery ticket by the petitioner and declaration of the prize amount of Rs.10,00,000/- thereon is concerned, the same is not disputed. The controversy is regarding denial of the petitioner’s claim due to non-submission of his claim within the period as prescribed under the Rules 2015. In this regard, it is relevant to refer to Rule 11 dealing with the payment of prizes, which reads as under:- “11. Payment of prizes.- (1) The payment of prizes below or equal to the value of 10,000/- rupees (ten thousand rupees) after deducting the applicable taxes as may be required under Taxation law, if any, to the prize winners on behalf of the State Government within a stipulated period as specified in the Schemes from time to time shall be made by the agent on behalf of the State and agent would seek reimbursement as per scheme. (2) The payment of bigger prizes shall be made by the Director after deducting the Income Tax. (3) The prizes, which are not claimed by the prize winners within a stipulated period as specified in the Scheme, shall stand forfeited to the State Government: Provided that the Director may after the expiry of the specified period in the Scheme, but not exceeding ‘ninety days’, disburse the prize amount to a prize winner on his application, for reasons, to be recorded in writing: Provided further that the State Government after the expiry of a period of ninety days, but not exceeding one hundred and eighty days, disburse the prize amount to a prize winner on his application, for reasons, to be recorded in writing. (4) If any prize money remains unclaimed or is not disbursed within the aforesaid specified period, it shall become the property of the State Government. To determine the unclaimed or undistributed prize money, the agents shall submit the prize winning tickets to the Director within the period, determined by the tender committee. (4) If any prize money remains unclaimed or is not disbursed within the aforesaid specified period, it shall become the property of the State Government. To determine the unclaimed or undistributed prize money, the agents shall submit the prize winning tickets to the Director within the period, determined by the tender committee. (5) For the purpose of transactional accounting in case of online lottery, the agents shall ensure the genuineness before disbursing all the prizes below and equal to Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand rupees) to the winners on the day of the draw or as specified in the Scheme.” 8. The petitioner admittedly did not submit his claim within the stipulated period. Reason given in the application is that he forgot about the lottery ticket after its purchase and did not even bother to check the result, but when the ticket was thereafter found with the other papers, necessary steps were taken. Be that as it may, specific timeline has been provided under the Rules. The period of delay which can be condoned by the authorities is clearly provided. The Director has the power to condone the delay of ninety days and an outer limit of 180 days is clearly stipulated in the proviso to Rule 11(3) of the Rules 2015 in respect to the power of the State Government to condone the delay in submission of the claim. Learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to point out any provision which affords power to the authorities to relax or condone any further delay. Argument raised by learned counsel for the petitioner that the provision itself is illegal, is devoid of any merit. It is to be noted at this juncture that first and foremost, there is no challenge to the said Rule in this writ petition. Moreover, learned counsel when confronted, is unable to deny that the said Rule has admittedly been promulgated in terms of Section 12 of the Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998 which confers power upon the State government to make Rules to carry out the provisions of the Act by way of a notification in the official gazette. Furthermore, Section 4 of the Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998 reads as under:- “4. CONDITIONS SUBJECT TO WHICH LOTTERIES MAY BE ORGANISED, ETC. Furthermore, Section 4 of the Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998 reads as under:- “4. CONDITIONS SUBJECT TO WHICH LOTTERIES MAY BE ORGANISED, ETC. - A State Government may organise, conduct or promote a lottery, subject to the following conditions, namely:- (a) Prizes shall not be offered on any pre-announced number or on the basis of a single digit; (b) The State Government shall print the lottery tickets bearing the imprint and logo of the State in such manner that the authenticity of the lottery ticket is ensured; (c) The State Government shall sell the tickets either itself or through distributors or selling agents; (d) The proceeds of the sale of lottery tickets shall be credited into the public account of the State; (e) The State Government itself shall conduct the draws of all the lotteries; (f) The prize money unclaimed within such time as may be prescribed by the State Government or not otherwise distributed, shall become the property of that Government; (g) The place of draw shall be located within the State concerned; (h) No lottery shall have more than one draw in a week; (i) The draws of all kinds of lotteries shall be conducted between such period of the day as may be prescribed by the State Government; (j) The number of bumper draws of a lottery shall not be more than six in a calendar year; (k) Such other conditions as may be prescribed by the Central Government.” 9. No other argument has been raised. Writ petition, is accordingly, dismissed with no order as to cost.