DIGAMBER SINGH Vs. HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER -Digamber has approached this Court through the present petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of Certiorari for quashing the eviction orders dated 12.7.2004 and 16.11.2004. The aforesaid orders have been appended as Annexures P-16 and P-19 respectively with the present petition.

(2.) THE facts which emerge from the record show that land measuring 2000 square yards in Dharuhera was given on lease to the petitioner by Estate Officer, Haryana Urban Development Authority, Gurgaon-respondent No. 2 vide two separate lease deeds dated 16.2.1981 and 15.4.1982. The period of lease was 15 years and the rent was fixed @ Rs. 312/- per months. The petitioner maintains that the aforesaid lease deed was renewable at the option of the lessee. After taking the aforesaid land on lease, the petitioner raised construction and set up a petrol pump. It has been maintained by the petitioner that he kept paying the rent regularly. It has also been stated by the petitioner that prior to the expiry of the aforesaid lease period, he had applied for renewal of the aforesaid lease. However, according to the petitioner, no action for renewing the lease was taken by the respondents.

(3.) AT this stage, the petitioner approached this Court through CWP No. 18170 of 2001 challenging the notice of recovery as well as imposition of penalty. Vide interim order dated 21.11.2001, a Division Bench of this Court directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 5 lacs within 6 weeks from the date of the order and upon the aforesaid deposit, the recovery of the balance was to remain stayed. Ultimately, the aforesaid petition came up for final hearing and was disposed of vide order dated 11.11.2003. The aforesaid recovery order and the penalty orders were quashed with liberty to the respondents to pass fresh orders in accordance with law after hearing the petitioner. Further undertaking of the petitioner was recorded that within 2 months of the passing of the order, petitioner would deposit a further sum of Rs. 5 lacs towards the claim raised by the respondents without prejudice to his rights and subject to the outcome of the proceedings before the authorities concerned.