( 1 ) THIS is a petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India (though filed under Art. 226) by the Kapadwanj Nagarpalika being aggrieved by the order of the learned Asst. Judge Kheda at Nadiad rejecting their appeal No. 118 183 the appeal having been preferred under sec. 9 of the Gujarat Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act 1972 The appeal before the learned appellate Judge had arisen from the decision of the Deputy Collector in the original proceedings under that Act. This Nagar Palika had initially granted lease of a parcel of land to the Burmah Shell (which is the short name for the Burmah Shell Oil Storage and Distribution Company of India Limited) for the period of ten years as per agreement annexure-A (page 16) dated 7/07/1968 As per that registered deed the lease commenced on 22-1-1966 and was to end on 21-1-1976. In that agreement there is a clause 3 which is reproduced below:"3 If the lessee shall have given to the lessor not less than two calendar months notice in writing prior to the expire of the term reserved herein expressing desire to renew the lease and shall have duly observed and performed all the terms and conditions hereof then the lessor will grant to the lessee a new lease of the demised land by way of renewal for such further term of years not exceeding ten years as the lessee shall desire in its absolute discretion to commence from the date of expire hereof at the rate of rent prevailing at the date of such consideration and upon the same terms and conditions in 311 respects as are reserved and contained hereinabove and except this present covenant for renewal unless it is specifically agreed by both parties that a further like option shall be included in the renewal lease". Now it so happened that not before two months as provided in the above said clause but three days later on i. e. on 25-11-1976 the Burmah Shell addressed a letter to the Nagar Palika telling them that they were willing to have the lease renewed for a further period of five years commencing from 22-1-1976. But curiously enough they mentioned that they would have the renewal at the same rent. This letter written by the Burmah Shell was made available to me at the time of hearing and the relevant words are reproduced by me: Vide the lease dated 7th July 1968 the abovbove cited lease was for a period of ten years from 22-1-1976 with an option for another ten ares at the same rent. The tenure will expire on 21-1-1976. (Emphasis supplied)" the Municipalitys working Committee then recommended to the General Board On 15-1-1976 that if the rent is paid at the rate of 0. 75 ps. per sq. ft. the lease be renewed for five years and the general Board passed a resolution being No. 31 on 30/01/1976 that the Burmah Shell Oil Storage and Distribution Company of India Ltd. be given renewal of the lease for five years operative from 22-1-1976 at the rate of 0. 75 Ps. per sq. ft.

( 2 ) NOW it so happened that the Burmah Shell i. e. the Burmah Shell Oil Storage and Distribution Company of India Ltd. came to be virtually liquidated by statutory operation and the Burmah Shell (Acquisition of Undertakings in India) Act 1976 had come to be passed by the Parliament and it came into force on 24/01/1976 As per sec. 3 on the appointed day i. e. on 24/01/1976 three days after the expire of the period of lease (without there being any renewal) the right title and interests of the Burmah Shell stood transferred to and stood vested in the Central Government. Mr. Gupta the learned counsel for the respondent invited my attention to sec. 7 of the said Act and submitted that on the very day by a notification the Central Government had directed that the vesting under sec. 3 shall stand in favor of the Government Company which was Burmah Shell Refineries Ltd. As in the earlier order of remand passed by the District Judge Kheda there is a reference to this vesting T do not consider it to be an innovation or a new plea but for the p