INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHERS Vs. UNION TERRITORY CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether a tenant of a building constructed on the site sold by the Chandigarh Administration under the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952 (for short, the Act) read with the Chandigarh (Sale of Sites and Buildings) Rules, 1960 (for short, the 1960 Rules) for running a tea stall can seek change of trade as of right and whether the order of resumption passed by the Assistant Estate Officer (exercising the powers of the Estate Officer), Union Territory, Chandigarh under Section 8-A of the Act is ultra vires to the provisions of the Act and the 1960 Rules and is contrary to the principles of natural justice are the issues which arise for determination in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by M/s. International Publishers.The fact

(2.) There is no dispute between the parties that on the basis of highest bid of Rs. 25,000/- given by him in the auction held by the Chandigarh Administration in May 1969, booth site No. 61, Sector 16-D, Chandigarh was allotted to the petitioner for running a tea stall subject to the terms and conditions stipulated in the letter dated 9-6-1969. After about 3 years, respondent No. 4 Joginder Pal applied for change of trade from tea stall to meat shop and vide memo No. 857-UTFI(III)-75/4092 dated 18-3-1975, the Administration sanctioned the change of trade. In the meanwhile, respondent No. 4 rented out the booth to the petitioner, who started running its office in the name of International Publishers. On receipt of the information about the use of the premises for a purpose other than the one stipulated in the allotment letter, the Assistant Estate Officer issued notice dated 6-7-1992 (Annexure P-3) to respondent No. 4 and the petitioner requiring them to show cause against the proposed resumption of the site on the ground of violation of the conditions of sale and by an order dated 20-8-1992 (Annexure P-4) he ordered the resumption of the site and forfeiture of 10% of the premium i.e. Rs. 2500/- plus interest by observing that neither the allottee nor the tenant has offered any justification for misuse of the premises. The appeal and the revision filed by the petitioner under Section 10 of the Act were dismissed by the Chief Administrator, Union Territory, Chandigarh (respondent No. 2) and the Adviser to the Administrator, Union Territory, Chandigarh respectively. Thereafter, order dated 21-1-1993 (Annexure P-1) was passed by respondent No. 3 under Section 5(i) of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 for ejectment of the petitioner and respondent No. 4.

(3.) It is borne out from the record that after a passing of order of resumption, Shri M.M.Kaushal, Proprietor of the petitioner submitted an application Annexure P-7 dated 26-4-1993 for permission to change the use of the trade and to allow him to run book shop instead of meat shop. The same was rejected by respondent No. 3 vide letter Annexure P-8 dated 3-5-1993 on the ground that with the resumption of the site, booth had become public property and having failed to convince the competent authority to accept its request, the petitioner invoked jurisdiction to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the order of resumption and the orders passed by the appellate and the revisional authorities.