1988 Supreme(All) 430
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
R.M. SAHAI, R.P.SINGH, JJ.
Smt. Lata Maheshwari - Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 2655 of 1988
Decided on: Sep 07, 1988
A.Kumar
A government directive restricting building construction on Nazul land if the unexpired period of lease was less than fifteen years was arbitrary and unwarranted, interfered with the lessee's right, and was contrary to the provisions of the Nazul Manual and the Transfer of Property Act.
Headnote:
NAZUL LAND - LEASE - BUILDING CONSTRUCTION - RESTRICTION - GOVERNMENT DIRECTIVE - QUASHED - ARBITRARY AND UNWARRANTED - INTERFERENCE WITH LESSEE'S RIGHT - TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882, SECTION 108.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, a purchaser of Nazul plot, was informed by the Development Authority that her plan for building construction could not be sanctioned as the unexpired period of lease was less than fifteen years, as per government order.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the government directive was arbitrary and unwarranted, interfered with the lessee's right, and was contrary to the provisions of the Nazul Manual and the Transfer of Property Act.
Issues: Whether the government directive restricting building construction on Nazul land if the unexpired period of lease was less than fifteen years was valid.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the government directive was invalid as it curtailed the lessee's right to use the property as his own, which was guaranteed under section 108 of the Transfer of Property Act.
Final Decision: The court quashed the government directive and directed the opposite parties to sanction the petitioner's plan for building construction.
R. M. Sahai, J.
1. What is assailed in this petition is a letter issued by government to all the District Magistrates directing them to ensure that permission to raise building on Nazul land was not granted if unexpired period of lease was less than fifteen years.
2. Factual narration is unnecessary except that the petitioner, a purchaser of Nazul plot, was informed by the Development Authority by letter dated 8th July, 1987 that since the period of lease was going to expire on 1st April, 2002 which was less than fifteen years her plan for building construction could not be sanctioned in view of government order dated 16th October, 1986. A copy of the order is on record. It is in two parts the preamble or the reason and the decision. According to it a lease for building purpose permits a lessee to complete the building within specified time as the objective behind such a provision is that life of the lessees may be coming to an end, simultaneously, with the period of the lease and the land after his death may revert to State Government. Further no alteration or construction could be made on Nazul land nor any change in existing structure could be made without obtaining prior permission. And it often happens that the request from lessees is received from time to time to construct houses on vacant land or reconstruct a house on the old site for which there being no guideline, difficulty arises and at times there are different decisions for different cases. Therefore, in order to bring uniformity the State, after fully examining the matter issued the guidelines (1) No permission to construct a house may be granted if the unexpired period of lease was fifteen years or less, (2) Permission should be granted only if the lessee was willing to surrender the lease and was agreeable for its renewal on payment of 50 percent of premium and rent on market rate.
Leases for building purposes is granted under paragraph 22 of the Mannual. And where the Nazul is managed by local body it is granted under paragraph 56 which reads as under :-
22. "Leases for building purposes.-Leases for building purposes shall not ordinarily before a shorter period than thirty years in the first instance, and shall in all cases, provide for renewals after the expiry of the first and subsequent terms upto a maximum of 90 years. The granting of a lease in perpetuity in respect of any Nazul land on any terms is prohibited". Paragraph 57 provides for renewal of leases. It is extracted below : -
57. "Renewal of lease.-When a lease is renewed or when the rent payable under a perpetual lease is revised, the Collector shall have regard to the circumstances of the plot and to the market-value of similar plots in the neighbourhood, and may enhance the rent by an amount not exceeding 50 per cent of the rent payable during the period immediately preceding the revision. In the case of a plot of which the estimated value exceeds Rs. 2,000/- the lessee may appeal against such enhancement to the Commissioner, whose order shall be final". Neither of these provisions or any paragraph in the Manual gives the least inkling that the building leases were granted so as to coincide with the life of a lessee. The assumption in the letter is unwarranted, proceeds on imagination and is contrary to paragraph 56 which visualises a building lease for not less than thirty years renewable to ninety years. The requirement to obtain permission to construct or make alteration is a factor which is irrelevant for renewal. Once a lease is granted for a building purpose then the right cannot be curtailed because the period was less than fifteen years. Whether after expiry of period the lessor shall renew the lease or not is lessor's right but it cannot restrict the lessee's right only because the unexpired period of lease was fifteen years. According to Mannual the shortest period for which a building lease can be granted is thirty years. But the letter purports to curtail it to fifteen years. T