YASHWANT SINGH NEGI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Review Petition is directed against the order dated 19.4.2004 by which the writ petition was dismissed. Petitioner Yashwant Singh Negi had filed the writ petition seeking a restraint on the respondents from cancelling the license of Shop No.3, Lodi Road Complex-II, New Delhi, allotted to him. Petitioner had also sought a direction for waiver of payment of licence fee from the date of allotment up to the date when electricity was provided to the shop, namely, 2.6.2000. The plea being that in the absence of electricity and water facilities, it was not possible to use the shop and make the payment of licence fee. Petitioner sought to place reliance on a decision of this Bench in CWP No.2175/1999 titled "Vishnu Dev Bhagat and Ors. Vs. Union of India". In the said writ petition, the Court had considered the plea of allottees of shops at Vasant Vihar for waiver of licence fee. Allottees complained of non-availability of basic amenities like water and electricity in the shops allotted and, therefore, waiver of the licence fee till the same were made available. The Bench, after examining all factors including the respondents' defence of the shops having been allotted on 'as is where is' basis and the petitioner therein having continued in possession, had permitted waiver of 50% of licence fee up to a date fixed by the Court, considering the conflicting claims regarding the date on which electricity was available.

(2.) The present petitioner's writ petition had, however, been dismissed vide the impugned order dated 19.4.2004, holding that the petitioner was not entitled to pursue and prosecute the same in view of the sub-letting of the allotted shop in question to one Rohitswa Tiwari.

(3.) The impugned order records that Shri Rohitswa Tiwari had approached the MTNL for grant of STD/ISD booth in the allotted shop and had submitted a GPA by the petitioner in his favour. A show cause notice had been issued to the petitioner against the alleged sub-letting. In the said proceedings on 1.4.2004, the petitioner had admitted the factum of occupation of the shop by Rohitswa Tiwari and his carrying on business from the shop in question. In view of this admitted position, the Court had declined to exercise the discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and to entertain the writ petition and dismissed the same. The petitioner preferred an LPA against the same. LPA was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to move an application for review. The Division Bench also directed: