SANTOSH NARAYAN @ SANTOSH Vs. STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Srivastva, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. P.K. Sinha, learned Sr. counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) THE petitioner have prayed for quashing the letters dated 17.7.2003 and 16.7.2003 as contained in Annexures -8 and 8/A to the writ application whereby the respondents he demanded development cost of the land failing which the agreement for lease shall be terminated.

(3.) FROM perusal of the impugned letters it transpires that the said demand has been made by the respondents as per the terms and conditions of the original deed of agreement coupled with the undertaking submitted by the petitioners regarding payment of development cost. Admittedly the plots were allotted to the petitioners for a period of 33 years by registered deed of lease which contains several terms and conditions. The question whether the respondents are entitled to realize and/or the petitioners are liable to pay development cost in terms of the lease agreement cannot be decided by this Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction. No constitutional or statutory right has been created under the lease agreement and, therefore, the reciprocal obligation of the parties can be determined only by a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction.