The government must act fairly and reasonably when fixing lease rents, reflecting public policy, and cannot unilaterally revise contract terms against original agreements.

JUDGMENT :

B.P. Colabawalla, J.

1. These writ petitions challenge the constitutional validity of certain terms on which long-term leases granted by the State to various lessees, most of which are Housing Societies, all located in Bandra, are being renewed. The litigation over these leases has had a chequered history in this Court, these petitions constituting the latest round of litigation. At the heart of the challenge is the assertion that any linkage between the lease rentals for the lands on which various residential premises stand, and the value of those lands, is per se prohibited owing to past rulings of this Court. The issues boil down to interpreting the terms of contract [the expired Lease Deeds] between the petitioners and the State, and the Government Resolutions that fix the methodology for calculating the lease rent payable by the Petitioners who seek renewal of their lease.

2. Added to the mix, are the terms on which the said Leasehold lands may be converted into Freehold lands under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, if the Petitioners so choose to do. However, this conversion issue is not under challenge in these proceedings. For completeness, we must also mention that some of the above Writ Petitions also challenge the constitutional validity of Article 36 (iv) to Schedule I of the Maharashtra Stamp Act , 1958 and the Government Resolution dated 31st October 2006. However, we are not deciding this challenge by the present judgement.

3. For the sake of context, we shall set out what each of the above Writ Petitions challenge in these proceedings. Writ Petition Nos.328 of 2015; 923 of 2014; 491 of 2014; 493 of 2014; 511 of 2015; 347 of 2015; 483 of 2015; 348 of 2015; and (L) 8174 of 2024 all challenge the Government Resolutions dated (i) 29th May 2006 (for short "the 2006 GR"); (ii) 12th December 2012 (for short "the 2012 GR"); and (iii) 5th May 2018 (for short "the 2018 GR") respectively. As a consequence, all the above-mentioned Petitions (except Writ Petition No. 328 of 2015) also challenge the Notice dated 30th March 2013 issued pursuant to the 2012 GR. Basically the 2012 GR and the 2018 GR set out the methodology for calculating the lease rent at which the expired leases would be renewed by the Government. The 2006 GR basically states that the Government has taken a policy decision to adopt the "Annual Statement of Rates", also commonly known as the "Ready Reckoner" rate, for determining the value of Government lands. Since the 2012 and the 2018 GRs seek to determine the lease rent payable on the basis of the value of the land [as per the Ready Reckoner], the 2006 GR is also challenged.

4. Over and above the aforesaid GRs, several Petitions, namely, Writ Petition Nos.328 of 2015; 491 of 2015; 493 of 2015; 511 of 2015; 347 of 2015; 483 of 2015; 348 of 2015; and (L) 8174 of 2024; also challenge the constitutional validity of Article 36 (iv) to Schedule I of the Maharashtra Stamp Act , 1958 and Government Resolution dated 31st October 2006.

5. Lastly, Writ Petition (L) No. 34697 of 2023; 3131 of 2022; and 3144 of 2022 only challenge the 2012 GR, the 2018 GR, and the Notice dated 30th March 2013 issued pursuant to the 2012 GR.

6. At the outset, we made it clear to the parties that the constitutional challenge to Article 36 (iv) of the Maharashtra Stamp Act , 1958 is not being decided by the present judgment and we would be only deciding the challenge to the 2006, 2012 and the 2018 GRs. Hence, the parties have proceeded before us on this basis. Since Mr. Rafique Dada, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners in Wr