The authority has the power to terminate a lease in case of breach, and a notice must be served before termination.

JUDGMENT :

Rai Chattopadhyay, J.

1. The original writ petitioner had died on July 3, 2020, during pendency of the present writ petition. The legal heirs of the original petitioner (since deceased) have been substituted in place of their deceased father, as the substituted writ petitioners in this case.

2. The writ petitioner has challenged the impugned order of the Special Secretary to the Government of West Bengal, Urban Development Department dated July 5, 2016. The said order is extracted as herein below:-

“With reference to your letter dated 29.06.2016 on the subject noted above, I am directed to say that the leasehold right of Plot No. EN-71, Sector-V, Salt Lake granted in favour of Sri Satya Ranjan Roy has been cancelled in terms of this Department’s Memo No. 852(2)-UD/O/M/SL(AL/NR)/9L-101/82(Pt.) dated 14.03.2016.

The possession of the plot is vested in the Urban Development Department.

Therefore, the question of reconsideration of the matter does not arise.”

3. The factual background of the case in brief, resulting into issuance of the said order by the authority dated July 5, 2016 and filing of the present writ petition may be stated as herein below:-

4. A lease agreement was entered into by one M/s. Roy & Company, with the Governor of the State of West Bengal, on September 4, 2009. The original writ petitioner (since deceased) was the proprietor of said M/s. Roy & Company. The lease was entered into to enable the writ petitioner (since deceased) as the proprietor of the said company, to hold the land, to erect a building thereon for use for manufacturing machinery parts.

Since after delivery of possession of the said land to the writ petitioner (since deceased), the land was demarcated with the boundary pillars, by the said original writ petitioner and thus since then he has been enjoying the possession and right over the said property, in terms of the lease deed as mentioned above.

The writ petitioner appointed constituted attorney vide a general power of attorney dated June 2, 2016, in order to arrange labour, engineers, supervisors, electricity personnel, waterline personnel and all other personnel for installations, fittings, amenities and obtain services from the appropriate authorities, as and when required. It is stated that on November 26, 2015, the original writ petitioner wrote to the Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department that he could not construct the building within the stipulated period as specified in the lease deed, due to the reason of his ill health and infirm financial condition. By dint of the said letter the original writ petitioner had sought for extension of the period for starting construction over the said piece of land, for at least another five years, from the date of the said letter.

On the same date, i.e. November 26, 2015, a show cause notice was issued by the Special Secretary to the Government of West Bengal to the writ petitioner (since deceased). The crux of the letter as above would be that by not constructing the building within the stipulated time of three years, as envisaged under Clause 2(6)(a) of the said lease deed, the writ petitioner (since deceased) had breached the agreed terms and conditions of lease. As such, he would be covered under cancellation clause of the lease deed, due to breach of the mutually agreed terms and conditions for construction within a stipulated period of time. An explanation was sought for as to why the Government shall not seize the said plot of land, for violation of Clause 2(6)(a) of the lease deed.

On January 25, 2006, is the reply of the erstwhile writ petitioner (since deceased) to the show cause notice, issued to him, in which he had reiterated the ground of his indisposition and prayer for permission for extension of time for constructing the building.

The authority sent its reply vide letter dated March 14, 2016, thereby holding that the clarification given by the erstwhile writ petitioner (since deceased) was not satisfactory and acceptabl