JUDGMENT : (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) : By means of this writ petition, petitioners have sought the following reliefs: “a) issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned demand dated 15.12.2022 since this demand pertains to the period when there was complete restriction/ prohibition on sale; and b) to register the Lease deed in favour of the Petitioners without any interest or penalty and receive the balance original consideration in equal monthly installment post registration of the purchase on instalment cum lease deed.” 2. Petitioners are challenging the demand of Rs.7,35,58,062/- made vide letter dated 15.02.2022 issued by Executive Engineer, Uttarakhand Avas Evam Vikas Parishad. Perusal of the said letter reveals that petitioners were allotted group housing plot no. 2 with certain conditions; since they did not adhere to the time schedule fixed for payment of balance sale consideration, therefore, they were asked to pay penal interest; petitioners requested for waiving penal interest, however, their request was turned down on the ground that there is no provision for waiving penal interest and they were asked to pay the balance amount of installments i.e. Rs.4,10,73,900/- with interest of Rs.3,24,84,162/- 3. It is not in dispute that allotment was made through a public auction, and allotment letter was issued, in favour of petitioners on 24.01.2013, which is on record as Annexure-6 to the writ petition. Perusal of the same reveals that petitioners’ bid for Group Housing Plot No. 2 admeasuring 4744.57 sq. mt. was accepted @ Rs.20,260/- per square meter and they were required to deposit 20% of the bid price within three months and the remaining amount as per the time schedule indicated in the allotment letter. The allotment letter provides that petitioners will have to deposit 50% of the amount on or before 31.01.2014 and the remaining amount with 15% interest in 72 monthly installments of Rs.10,16,522/- each, commencing from 01.02.2014, and in case of default, petitioners would be liable to pay additional interest @ 18%. 4. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that sale of land by Avas Evam Vikas Parishad was banned by the State Government, and execution of sale deed was not possible, therefore, petitioners cannot be made liable to pay penal interest for the delay in payment of installments, as the sale consideration has to be paid at the time of execution of sale deed. He also refers to an interim order dated 20.03.2015 passed by coordinate Bench of this Court in WPMS No. 670 of 2015, whereby ban was imposed on auction, allotment and sale of land by Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad. He submits that the ban imposed in the said writ petition was lifted by Division Bench of this Court, vide order dated 05.12.2019, thus according to him, petitioners are not liable to pay penal interest for the period while ban remained in force. He further submitted that petitioners paid substantial amount to Avas Evam Vikas Parishad upto 09.06.2017, even after imposition of ban, therefore, they cannot be held responsible for not paying the installments in time. 5. Mr. Rahul Consul, learned counsel appearing for Uttarakhand Avas Evam Vikas Parishad, however submits that as per the conditions mentioned in the allotment order and also the hire purchase agreement, petitioners were liable to pay installments, as per the given time schedule, and in case of default, petitioners were liable to pay penal interest. He further submits that petitioners had admitted their liability in a letter dated 20.02.2017, submitted before the Estate Management Officer, Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad in which they stated that due to demonetization, difficulty is being faced by them in making timely deposit of installments. 6. Hire purchase agreement executed between petitioners and Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad on 19.2.2014 is on record as Annexure-9 to the writ petition. As per Clause 3(d) of the said agreement, petitioners were required to deposit installment of Rs.10,16,522/- on the first day of each month to the owner of the land, without waiting for any demand. In Clause 3(.k) of the said agreement, there is a stipulation that in case of default in timely payment of installments, petitioners shall be liable to pay penal interest @ 18%. Clause 4 of the agreement provides that after paying all installments and other dues as per the hire purchase agreement, a transfer deed shall be executed in favour of petitioners and they will then acquire freehold right in respect of the land allotted to them. Clause 6 of the agreement provides that in case of any dispute or difference, the same shall be referred for decision to Housing Commissioner. 7. Clause 6 of the agreement provides that in case of any dispute or difference, the same shall be referred for decision to Housing Commissioner. 7. From the documents enclosed with the writ petition, it is revealed that petitioners had entered into a hire purchase agreement with Avas Evam Vikas Parishad. As per the hire purchase agreement, petitioners had to deposit certain amount upfront and the remaining amount, in installments, as per the time schedule indicated in the agreement. Petitioners were liable to pay 15% interest, and in case of default in payment of installments as per schedule, they were liable to pay penal interest @18%. The explanation offered by learned counsel for petitioners for not paying the installments in time, cannot be accepted. Sale deed was to be executed in favour of petitioners only upon payment of the entire sale consideration with interest, therefore, the ban imposed on execution of sale deed cannot be a valid defence for not paying the installments in time. As per the time schedule indicated in clause 3 of the hire purchase agreement, the installments were to be paid between February, 2014 to January, 2020; while according to own showing of the petitioners, the ban on execution of sale deed, was lifted on 05.12.2019. It is thus apparent that petitioners have offered a lame excuse for not depositing installments, in time. The fact remains that they have defaulted in paying installments as per the time schedule, therefore, as per the conditions of the said agreement, they are liable to pay additional interest of 18% on delayed payment of installments. 8. Thus, petitioners are under a contractual liability to pay additional interest of 18% on delayed payment of installments. The demand raised by respondent no. 1 is as per the conditions of hire purchase agreement. Thus, there is no scope for interference with the demand made by the impugned order dated 15.12.2022. 9. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners then submitted that petitioners have paid a substantial amount to the respondents, however, the amount deposited by them from time to time has not been taken into account and more amount has been demanded from the petitioners than what is actually due. 10. If that is so, petitioners shall be at liberty to make representation to the competent authority, indicating the amount they are liable to pay as per their calculation. 10. If that is so, petitioners shall be at liberty to make representation to the competent authority, indicating the amount they are liable to pay as per their calculation. Petitioners shall also submit computation sheet indicating the amount deposited by them till date. If, petitioners make such representation within ten days from today, decision thereupon shall be taken within three weeks thereafter. 11. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.