Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
DINESH MAHESHWARI, J.K. MAHESHWARI, JJ.
Bhasin Infotech and Infrastructure Private Ltd. - Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. - Respondents
Transferred Case (Civil) No. 82 of 2022
Decided On : 17-03-2023
Land Laws – Conversion of land from leasehold to freehold – Prayer of petitioner for grant of freehold rights cannot be granted contrary to terms of allotment and covenants of lease deeds – Permissibility of – Subject land was allotted to petitioner after acceptance of its offer of allotment of the industrial plot by UPSIDC – Land was allotted on 90 years lease basis – When land had already been leased to petitioner and petitioner is also holding the same as lessee under lease deeds executed for the purpose, there does not appear any reason, justification, logic or rationale that such leasehold rights be converted into freehold rights – Whatsoever had been composition of Committee, it could have only made recommendation for final decision by competent authority – Merely for presence of Principal Secretaries of Departments concerned in Committee, it cannot be held that its recommendation itself would become a binding decision – Policy in question cannot be applied in relation to subject land – Claim of petitioner has rightly been rejected. (Paras 15.1, 15.5, 15.6, 17.1)
Facts of the case:
In this transferred case, registered on withdrawal of a writ petition filed by the petitioner in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Writ Petition No. 3790 of 2022) to this Court, the petitioner-company has challenged the order dated 24.01.2022 issued by respondent No. 1 in not accepting its proposal to convert subject land from leasehold to freehold as per policy formulated on 06.11.2013 and amended on 03.05.2016.
Principal question arising for determination in present matter is whether the petitioner is entitled to seek conversion of subject land from leasehold to freehold in view of the policy formulated by respondent No. 1 State on 06.11.2013, as amended on 03.05.2016.
Findings of Court:
This judgment shall otherwise be of no bearing on the other issues pending or arising between the parties. This judgment shall be relevant only to the extent of rejection of prayer of petitioner-company for converting subject land from leasehold to freehold and not beyond.
Result : Writ Petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Dinesh Maheshwari, J.
1. In this transferred case, registered on withdrawal of a writ petition filed by the petitioner in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Writ Petition No. 3790 of 2022) to this Court, the petitioner-company has challenged the order dated 24.01.2022 issued by respondent No. 1 in not accepting its proposal to convert the subject land from leasehold to freehold as per the policy formulated on 06.11.2013 and amended on 03.05.2016.
2. In the writ petition so filed in the High Court and transferred to this Court, the petitioner has sought the reliefs in the following terms:-
“a. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 24.01.2022 passed by Respondent No.1 (Annexure-11) to the writ petition and directing the Respondent No.2 to grant freehold plot no. SH-3, Surajpur Site-IV in the light of approval dated 16.09.2016 extending benefits of Government Orders dated 06.11.2013 and 03.05.2016.
b. To pass such other and further order, which this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the present case.
c. Award the cost of the present petition to the Petitioner.”
3. The relevant background and factual aspects leading to this writ petition and its transfer to this Court could be taken into comprehension as follows,1[The extractions herein are essentially taken from IA No. 15392 of 2022 and IA No. 156279 of 2022 filed by the petitioner for placing on record the English translation of the documents sought to be referred, as also from the documents filed with the writ petition.]:
3.1. On 05.08.2006, the petitioner-company’s offer (bid) for allotment of commercial Plot No. SH-3 in Industrial Area Site-IV, Surajpur, District Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh with approximate area 37500 sq. mtrs. came to be accepted by the Uttar Pradesh State Industrial Development Corporation,2[‘UPSIDC’, for short.]
-3[This Corporation is now known as Uttar Pradesh State Industrial Development Authority (‘UPSIDA’, for short) and is impleaded as respondent No.2 as such. However, for continuity of discussion herein, respondent No. 2 is also referred to as ‘UPSIDC’.] and, accordingly, the allotment letter was issued in favour of the petitioner stating the terms and conditions of this allotment, including that the land was being allotted on 90 years lease basis. A few relevant stipulations in this allotment letter dated 05.08.2006 read as under: -
“ **** **** ****
9. The Possession of Land will be handed over/delivered to you after payment of 25% of total amount (as per bid) and after Execution of Lease Deed with the Corporation. The allottee/Developer will have to take possession after execution of lease deed within three months from the date of allotment letter failing which plot is liable to cancelled.
10. a. The allottee shall have the right to sell of the built up portion to any person for its choice for first such transfer no levy shall be charged by UPSIDC.
b. The triparite Lease Deed of the built-up premises shall be executed by UPSIDC Ltd., with the ultimate allottees of Developer on the request of the developer in writing.
In Triparite lease deed, the allottee of developer shall be the lessee, the UPSIDC Ltd., will be the lesser and the developer shall be a confirming party. The UPSIDC will be transferring the proportionate undelivered interest in the land while the developer will be transferring the interest in the built-up space.
c. The Lease Deed of a built-up space will be executed only after the corporation has given completion certificate. For that built up space.
**** **** ****
14.(a) The land is allotted on 90 years lease basis which has to be specified to its tenants/Co./Owners
(b) The Lease Deed will be executed by the corporation directly with the various persons on the recommendation made by you without any transfer charges. On the subsequent transfer of the premises/plot, levy as per the prevailing rules of the corporation at that time will be char
The court upheld the government's authority to change land use from hospital to IT services, affirming that the original allotment was valid and notifications were legally issued.
The court emphasized the importance of upholding lease terms and the inapplicability of conversion schemes to terminated leases.
The court emphasized the significance of upholding the terms of the Lease Deed, the impact of termination of the Lease Deed, and the applicability of the Conversion Scheme in determining the rejectio....
The court held that the lessee is entitled to the provision of an approach road as stipulated in the lease deed, justifying waivers of interest and zero period until compliance by the lessor.
Developers are entitled to waivers and extensions when failure to provide essential infrastructure, such as access roads, obstructs project execution, affirming obligations under lease agreements.
Under the Scheme for conversion from leasehold to freehold, applications cannot be processed if the lease is cancelled and litigation regarding the property title is pending.
The court established that under Sec. 127 of the MRTP Act, a land reservation lapses if the planning authority fails to initiate acquisition proceedings within the specified time after a purchase not....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
