Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2017 Supreme(Pat) 708

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
RAJENDRA MENON, ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY, JJ.
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue and Land Reforms - Appellant
Versus
Khas Mahal Citizen Welfare Society through its General Secretary - Respondent
Letters Patent Appeal No.979 of 2016 Arising out of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 19325 of 2013
Decided On : 19-07-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Khurshid Alam.
For the Respondent:Mr. Y.V. Giri, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Jitendra Kishore Verma, Mr. Nikhil Kumar Agrawal, Advocate

The court established that the Bihar Khas Mahal Policy, 2011 had prospective effect and could not be applied retroactively to acts of the Society and its members prior to its coming into force.

Headnote:
Bihar Khas Mahal Policy, 2011 - Lease Grant - Interpretation of Policy
Fact of the Case:

The appeal was filed by the State Government seeking exception to an order passed by the Writ Court regarding the lease granted to the respondent Society and its members. The issue involved pertained to the action taken by the Society in pursuance to the lease granted.
Finding of the Court:

The Writ Court found that the policy of 2011 will have prospective effect and cannot be applied to any act of the Society and its members prior to its coming into force. It held that the State had the right to proceed in the matter of cancellation of the lease deed in accordance with the law or to take recourse to the remedy of filing a suit for getting the transaction declared as null and void, which took place prior to the policy coming into force.
Issues: Interpretation of the Bihar Khas Mahal Policy, 2011 and its applicability to acts of the Society and its members prior to its coming into force.
Ratio Decidendi: The policy of 2011 was found to have prospective effect and could not be used against the acts of the Society and its members which took place prior to its coming into force.
Final Decision: The Letters Patent Appeal stands dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

RAJENDRA MENON, J.

1. Seeking exception to an order dated 08.10.2015 passed by the learned Writ Court in C.W.J.C. No. 19325 of 2013, this appeal has been filed by the State Government and the issue in question involved pertains to lease granted to the respondent Society and its members (lessee) and certain action said to have been taken by the Society in pursuance to the lease granted.

2. Taking shelter of a policy which came into force in the year 2011, namely, the Bihar Khas Mahal Policy, 2011, action was proposed to be taken against the Society and the Society and its members (lessee) approached this Court in the writ petition and in the writ petition it was found that the policy of 2011 will have prospective effect, will not apply and cannot be made applicable to any act of the Society and its members prior to coming into force of the policy and further holding that if any act has been undertaken contrary to the lease deed prior to forming of the policy, the State had right to proceed in the matter of cancellation of the lease deed in terms of the lease deed and to get the lease deed cancelled in accordance with law or to take recourse to the remedy of filing a suit for getting the transaction declared as null and void i.e. which took place prior to coming into force of the policy in question. Prima facie holding that the policy in question which came in the year 2011 cannot be used against the acts of the Society and its members which took place prior to coming into force of the policy, the writ petition has been allowed and liberty has been granted to the State Government to proceed in accordance with law for violation of the lease deed granted. In fact by the policy in question the State Government is trying to change the conditions of the lease, which according to learned Writ Court was not permissible.

3. In the circumstances, we are of the considered view that the Writ Court has not committed any error warranting consideration.

4. The Letters Patent Appeal stands dismissed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document