VIJAY KUMAR Vs. N D M C

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner being the highest tenderer was allotted shop No. 243, Palika Bazar, Connaught Place, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the property, for short). The tender of the petitioner was submitted on 17th October, 1981. A licence deed dated 22nd January, 1982 was executed between the petitioner and the respondent-New Delhi Municipal Committee now known as New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC, for short).

(2.) Some of the shopkeepers in Palika Bazar had filed writ petitions alleging unfair discrimination and also failure of NDMC to enforce adherance to trade zone restrictions. The said writ petitions were disposed of vide judgment dated 29th May, 1981 quashing the trading zone restrictions. One of the contentions raised in some of the writ petitions was that the shopkeepers had suffered losses on account of failure of the respondent-NDMC to enforce adherance to trading zone restrictions as they had quoted higher amount in the tender relying upon trading zone restrictions. As noticed above, the tender was submitted by the petitioner on 17th October, 1981, which is after the date of this judgment on 29th May, 1981. It is, therefore, clear that the petitioner was aware when he submitted his tender that some of the shopkeepers were not adhering to the trading zone restrictions. The petitioner cannot, therefore, contend that when he submitted his tender, he was under the impression that NDMC would strictly enforce the trading zone restrictions. The contention of the petitioner that he suffered losses because of the failure of NDMC to adhere to the said trading zone restrictions, therefore, fails and has no merit.

(3.) The decision of the single Judge of this Court dated 29th May, 1981 was reversed in appeal by Division Bench vide judgment dated 18th March, 1983, titled Sanjiv Prakash and others versus New Delhi Municipal Committee, New Delhi and Others, AIR 1983 Delhi 478. The Division Bench held that trade zoning restrictions were applicable but distinction was drawn between shopkeepers of Panchkuian Road and others. It was held that the parties should pay the licence fee amounts agreed upon as per the bids given by them.