Sabka Vishwas Scheme: committee cannot reopen eligibility after issuing estimate and must facilitate settlement once amount is accepted.

Under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, the designated committee must verify the declaration, issue an estimate where the quantified amount differs, and give a hearing before finalising the payable sum. Once the committee issued the estimate and quantified the amount payable, it could not reopen the declaration and reject eligibility on the ground that the declaration was not separately quantifiable before the relevant date. Refusal to accept payment after the declarant accepted the quantified amount was inconsistent with the Scheme, and the petitioner was entitled to settlement. The rejection orders were unsustainable, and the respondents had to permit payment of the quantified amount with interest and issue Form SVLDRS-3.

---

---

Issues: Whether the designated committee could re-examine and reject the declaration after issuing the estimate under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019, and whether the petitioner was entitled to be permitted to pay the amount shown in the estimate with consequential issuance of Form SVLDRS-3.

Analysis: Under the Scheme, the designated committee is required to verify the declaration and, where the estimated amount exceeds the declared amount, issue an estimate and afford an opportunity of hearing before issuing the statement indicating the amount payable. Once the estimate was issued, the committee could not review its own determination by re-opening the declaration and rejecting it on the ground that the declaration was not separately quantifiable before the relevant date. The petitioner had already been found eligible and the committee itself had quantified the payable amount. The later refusal to accept payment on the ground of expiry of the extended time was also inconsistent with the scheme, because once the petitioner accepted the quantified amount, the committee was required to facilitate settlement and issue the statutory form required for payment.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to the benefit of the Scheme. The rejection orders were unsustainable, and the respondents were required to permit payment of the quantified amount with interest and to issue Form SVLDRS-3.

---