INDERJEET SINGH Vs. MCD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition is filed by the petitioner praying inter alia, amongst others, for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents No. 1 and 2, MCD to execute a lease in perpetuity (99 years) in respect of shop No. 3635, Ward 11, Faiz Bazar, Netaji Subhash Marg, daryaganj, New Delhi in favour of the petitioner, for quashing the notice dated 24/25. 09. 1990 calling upon the petitioner to hand over vacant possession of the aforesaid shop and pay damages for unauthorized use thereof w. e. f. 11. 12. 1981, till the date of vacation and for quashing the proceedings pending before the Estate Officer, respondent No. 3 herein.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case are that pursuant to an auction in respect of the aforesaid shop held by the respondent No. 1 on 15. 04. 1971, the petitioner was declared the highest bidder and allotted the shop by virtue of an indenture dated 04. 08. 1971, for a period of five years at the rate of Rs. 900/- per month. Thereafter, the petitioner continued in occupation of the aforesaid shop on the basis of extension granted by the respondent No. 1 for a period of 11 months. In September, 1977, the petitioner approached the respondent No. 1 with a request that the shop should be given to him on a 99 years leasehold basis. The said request was considered by the Standing Committee of the respondent/mcd, which passed Resolution No. 102 on 01. 09. 1977 (Item No. 65), to the effect that the mode of disposal of the said shop shall be changed on rent from 5 years license basis, to 33 years through open public auction.

(3.) ON 17. 01. 1978, the respondent issued a letter to the petitioner calling upon him to hand over vacant possession of the shop to the MCD. As the petitioner failed to do so, the respondent issued him a letter dated 18. 04. 1978, followed by a petition filed under Sections 4 and 7 of the Public premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Act' ). The aforesaid petition was disposed of by the estate Officer vide order dated 31. 03. 1980 in favour of the respondent (the petitioner herein ). The operative para of the said order is reproduced hereinbelow: