SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Jhk) 839

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY, J.
M/s Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, through its Deputy General Manager-Retail and Duly Constituted Attorney, Shri Sumant Jha, son of late Balgovind Jha - Petitioner
Versus
East Central Railway, a Government of India undertaking, through its General Manager and Ors. - Respondents
W.P. (C) No. 655 of 2021
Decided On : 21-11-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Rahul Gupta, Advocate, Mr. Rahul Lamba, Advocate, Mr. Nilesh Modi, Advocate, Mr. Aditya Mohan Khandelwal, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Anil Kumar, ASGI, Mr. Ravi Prakash, CGC.

The court ruled that disputes over accounting for license fees should be resolved through appropriate administrative channels, while eviction proceedings can proceed based on the Railways' needs.

Headnote:(A) Writ Jurisdiction - Quashing of demand notices - The petitioner challenged the legality of demand notices for outstanding license fees issued by the Railways, claiming arbitrary and unreasonable demands. The court noted the absence of license renewal since March 2016 and the unexplained increase in demand from Rs. 2.64 crores to Rs. 5.15 crores. (Paras 12, 15)

(B) Eviction Proceedings - The court held that the eviction matter is distinct from the accounting dispute and can be pursued separately by the Railways in accordance with law. (Paras 18, 19)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner has occupied Railway land for a petrol pump since 1953, facing demands for outstanding fees without renewal of the license since 2016.

Findings of Court:
The court directed the respondent to resolve the accounting dispute and allow the petitioner to present their case, while also permitting the Railways to pursue eviction proceedings.

Issues: The main issues were the legality of the demand notices and the process for eviction.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that disputes regarding accounting should be resolved through appropriate channels, and eviction can proceed based on the Railways' needs.

Result: Writ petition disposed of with directions.

JUDGMENT :

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)

Heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties.

2. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-

    (a) For the issuance of an appropriate writ or writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the letter, dated 05.01.2021 and bearing reference No. L/1/Genl./License Fee, issued by the Respondent No.4 to the Petitioner (Annexure -7) whereby the Respondents have arbitrarily, unreasonably and unlawfully directed the Petitioner to vacate the land, admeasuring an area of 8000 sq. ft, of Railways which is under the possession and occupation of the petitioner since the year 1953 for running the Petrol Pump at Station Road, Dhanbad for the alleged reason of non-submission of the alleged outstanding license fee of Rs. 5,15,93,621/-and the Respondents vide the said letter dated 05.01.2021 have stated that in case if the petitioner fails to vacate the said premises/ Petrol Pump/ Retail Outlet, then the Respondents will evict the Petitioner from the said land.

    (b) For the issuance of an appropriate writ or writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the letter, dated 25.08.2020 and bearing reference No. W466/license/HPCL/Station/DHN, issued by the Respondent No.3 to the Petitioner (Annexure -5) whereby the Respondents have made arbitrary, unreasonable and unlawful demand of the alleged outstanding license fees of Rs. 2,64,67,320/-till the period 2019-20 from the Petitioner towards the land, admeasuring an area of 8000 sq. ft, of the Railway which is under the possession and occupation of the petitioner for running the Petrol Pump at Station Road, Dhanbad.

    (c) For the issuance of an appropriate writ or a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents to demand a reasonable and fair amount of rent/license fees for the period 2016-17 to 2019-20 or thereafter towards the concerned land on which the Petitioner is running a petrol pump at Station Road, Dhanbad since 1953 based on a valuation done by an independent valuer appointed by this Hon'ble Court or based on a valuation done by an valuer appointed by consent of the Petitioner and the Respondents.

    (d) For the issuance of an appropriate writ or a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents not to raise any demand upon the Petitioner for rent/ licensee fees in respect of the Concerned Plot for the period prior to 2015-16.

    (e) For the issuance of an appropriate writ or a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents not to raise any demand upon the Petitioner for rent/ licensee fees in respect of the Concerned Plot which demand is unreasonable and not a fair value or which is not as per the mutual agreement between the Petitioner and the Respondents.

    (f) For the issuance of any other appropriate writ or order(s) as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper for doing conscionable justice to the Petitioner.

    (g) For the issuance of an interim order directing the Respondents not to take any coercive steps against the Petitioner till the pendency of this writ petition.

Arguments of the Petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in occupation of the property involved in the present case since 1953 which was renewed by way of license every year and the last renewal was till March 2016 and there has been no further renewal. However, the petitioner continued to occupy the property and the cause of action to move this court arose when a letter dated 25.08.2020 was issued to the petitioner under the subject “Realisation of outstanding license fee amounting to Rs. 2,64,67,320 on account of using Railway land measuring 8000 Sqr. Ft. for HPCL petrol pump at Dhanbad” and it has been mentioned that the petitioner has not deposited any amount after 2015-16. The outstanding dues was calculated up to 2019-20. A request was also made to the petitioner process for renewal of license agreement as per Railway Board norms. Along with the said notice, a chart was given with regard to

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top