Judgment

VARADARAJAN, J.:- This appeal by special leave is by the respondents in Civil Rule 420 of 1966* against the judgment and order dated 30th July, 1968 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Assam and Nagaland, allowing the writ petition with no order as to costs. That writ petition was filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution for quashing the order of requisition issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Lakhimpur-Dibrugarh, the second appellant in this appeal and the first respondent in the writ petition - under Memo No. LA/27511-15/R dated 25-10-1966. The Memo was issued in exercise of the powers conferred by S. 29 (i) of the Defence of India Act, 1962 (51 of 1962) read with the notification of the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs No. S. O. 1888 dated 10th June, 1965 in respect of the properties described in the schedule attached thereto viz. Sookerating Tea Estate and Budla Beta Tea Estates, situate in Dum-Duma, Mauza Lakhimpur District on the ground that the lands were necessary for securing the defence of the country and efficient conduct of military operations.

* Reported in AIR 1969 Assam 7.

2. During the Second World War, in 1940 the Government of India acquired for defence purposes a part of Sookerating Tea Estate with its adjoining lands measuring in all 769.20 acres for constructing an air field. The air field was constructed over an area of 469 acres and on the remaining 300.20 acres there were tea bushes which were growing wild and overgrown with thick jungles. After the war was over, the area on which the air field had been constructed viz. 469 acres was transferred to the State Government for its use. In the writ petition it was stated that that area was still lying unused. The Government of India wanted to lease out the said 300.20 acres to some established tea planters with a view to earn foreign exchange. The respondent a registered partnership firm owning the Bagrodia Tea Estate negotiated with the Estates Military officer, Assam Circle at Shillong and the Ministry of Defence, Government of India and entered into an agreement of lease dated 2-3-1962 in respect of the land on a rent of Rs. 6304.20 per annum for a term of one year renewable for a period of one year at a time if the land was not required by the lessor. The respondent took possession of the land on 10-3-1962 after paying the annual rent in advance on 2-3-1962. It was alleged in the writ petition that the respondent thereafter improved the land at a cost of Rs. 1,75,000/- and made it into a well managed tea garden. The Military Estates officer was putting off the execution of the lease deed on some pretext or the other, though the respondent had deposited the requisite stamp papers for the execution of the lease deed. When the respondent approached the Government of India through a member of Parliament, the Deputy Minister for Defence informed the member of Parliament by his letter dated 20-12-1962 that the land was required for defence purposes and that it would not be possible to extend the current lease. Subsequently the Defence Minister informed the member of Parliament by his letter dated 1-4-1963 that as several tea planters have evinced interest in the estate it was decided to auction the leasehold right in the land on an annual basis subject to the condition that the land might be resumed for defence purposes at short notice. No action was taken on the respondents request made on 25-1-1963 for renewal of the lease. But the Military Estate officer, Jorhat Circle, the 4th appellant, issued a notice on 20-3-1963 for leasing the land for one year by public auction. The respondent filed a writ petition in the High Court and obtained rule nisi as well as an interim order restraining the appellants from giving effect to the said notice dated 20-3-1963. The petition filed by the appellants on 28-5-1963 for restraining the respondent from plucking tea leaves was rejected. The respondent filed Title Suit No. 30 of 1963 in the C