(1.) In all these appeals common question of law and facts are involved hence they are decided by this common judgment.
(2.) By way of these appeals, the appellants have assailed the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge whereby learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petitions.
(3.) The facts of the case are that for 105 acres of land, a lease deed was executed in favour of Diamond and Gem Development Corporation Ltd. (for short "DGDC"). It was for setting a Gem Stone Industrial Park. The execution of the lease was on certain terms and conditions. The DGDC executed a lease in favour of the appellant and, accordingly, he possesses the land and paid due amount to the DGDC. In most of the cases, 100% lease amount was paid. Due to default of the DGDC to develop area in terms of agreement, its lease deed was cancelled by the RIICO. The DGDC challenged cancellation of lease and writ petitions therein were allowed. Against the said order, the RIICO preferred a special leave to appeal before the Apex Court. It was allowed and the judgment of the Division Bench in the writ petitions preferred by DGDC was set aside. It was mainly on the ground that remedy was available to the DGDC against cancellation of lease but without availing it, they approached the High Court. Accordingly, judgment of the Apex Court was not after touching merit of the case. The sub-lease executed by DGDC in favour of the appellant was later on recognised by the RIICO. In few cases, the RIICO admitted receipt of 100% amount from the appellant. In view of the above, sub-lease in favour of the appellant should not have been subjected to the lease granted in favour of the DGDC and its cancellation. An independent right was created in favour of the appellant. They remained in possession of the land but without a notice and even information, the constructions were demolished and appellant was dispossessed.