Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD AT LUCKNOW BENCH
P.K. JAISWAL, RAJNISH KUMAR, JJ.
Prayas Buildcon (P) Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Misc. Bench No. 12081 of 2009
Decided On : 17-05-2019
LEASEHOLD RIGHTS - CONVERSION INTO FREEHOLD - LEASE DEED - TERMS AND CONDITIONS - RENEWAL - ASSIGNMENT - LEASE RENT - STAMP DUTY - BUILDING PLANS - MASTER PLAN - PUBLIC PURPOSE - SELF-ASSESSMENT SCHEME - MUTATION - NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE - PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION - ADMISSIBILITY.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, M/s. Arif Industries Limited, purchased a piece of land from the original lessee, M/s. Upper India Couper Paper Mills Company Ltd., and applied for conversion of its leasehold rights into freehold rights in respect of 75,000 sq. mtrs. of land under self-assessment scheme and deposited a sum of Rs. 6,46,87,500/- in the shape of demand draft with the Nazul Officer, Lucknow Development Authority, Lucknow. The Nazul Officer gave its No Objection for the proposed construction by the petitioner and acknowledged that the petitioner had deposited a sum of Rs. 6,46,87,500/- under self-assessment scheme seeking conversion of leasehold rights into freehold in respect of 75000 sq. mtrs. of the aforesaid leasehold land. The petitioner also got its name duly mutated in respect of the aforesaid property in question acquired through the registered Deed of assignment of leasehold rights in respect of the land and sale of consideration in the records of Nagar Nigam, Lucknow. The petitioner also deposited strengthening charges to the tune of Rs. 10,09,473/- with Nagar Nigam, Lucknow. The petitioner obtained 17 numbers of No Objection Certificates from various departments with respect to the building plans as required by the opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 and incurred huge expenditure in respect thereto. In spite of completion of all formalities, no letter of demand indicating balance amount to be deposited by the petitioner towards conversion of leasehold rights into freehold rights was issued. On 1.10.2009, the petitioner received a letter from the opposite party No. 2 that its application seeking conversion of leasehold rights into freehold rights was rejected vide order dated 20.5.2009 on the ground that the land in question is subject matter of dispute of SLP No. 18734 of 2008, Lucknow Development Authority v. Upper India Couper Paper Mills Ltd. before Hon'ble Supreme Court and the land in question is most suitable for the purposes of development of affordable Housing in respect of Economically Weaker Sections, Low Income Group and Medium Income Group by looking into their paying capacity.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the terms of the lease deed specifically provided that the Assignee/transferee of the lease from the lessee shall also be bound by its terms. When the renewal clause read, "lease is renewable upto aggregate period of 90 (ninety) years subject to the enhancement of rent by 50% after each 30 years," the enhanced amount of lease rent (by 50%) was deposited in time, the division Bench rightly held that the lease stands renewed upto 2032. The entire controversy stands settled by the judgment dated 23.05.2008 passed by this Court and the Special Leave Petitions of the State of U.P. and LDA and others challenging the said judgment were dismissed. The plea above on which the case was decided on 23.05.2008 is binding upon the respondents as a precedent, thus, what has been stated therein has precedential value under Article 141 of the Constitution of India.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner was entitled to get the leasehold rights converted into freehold rights? 2. Whether the rejection of the petitioner's application for conversion of leasehold rights into freehold rights was justified?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The terms of the lease deed clearly acknowledged the explicitly as well as implicitly provided for assignment of lease rights by the lessee to any person or entity. 2. A Division Bench of this Court while adjudicating earlier Writ Petition No. 9360 (MB) of 2007 on 23.5.2008 has clearly held that the lease in favour of Upper India Couper Paper Mills Co. Ltd. is valid till 2032. 3. The land of the petitioner has been lawfully assigned to it and the same has been recognized by the Nazul department as they effected the mutation of the subject in the name of the petitioner on 19.2.2007. 4. No formal renewal of lease was ever necessary. 5. Special Nazul Officer of the Nazul Department, i.e. opposite party No. 16 had clearly acknowledged the validity of the lease over the land in question for a period of 90 years and confirmed that the entire rent stood deposited and there was no necessity of execution of renewal deed.
Final Decision: The Court allowed the writ petition filed by the petitioner and quashed the orders dated 20.05.2009 and 01.10.2009. The Court directed the respondents to proceed for conversion of property to freehold expeditiously in accordance with law in terms of the order dated 23.05.2018 passed in Writ Petition No. 9360 (MB) of 2007 and the ratio laid down by Full Bench in the case of Anand Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. and others (AIR 2014 All 106 (FB) (Supra). The Court also dismissed the PIL filed by the petitioner with cost of Rs. 25,000/-.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri. Samir Rohtagi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. Q.H. Rizvi, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No. 1, Sri. Madan Mohan Pandey and Sri. Shobit Mohan Shukla, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 3/Lucknow Development Authority.
2. Writ Petition No. 12081 (MB) of 2009 is directed against an order dated 20.5.2009 passed by the Vice-Chairman, Lucknow Development Authority, Lucknow acting as Special Nazul Officer as well as on behalf of the State of Uttar Pradesh rejecting the application dated 22nd March, 2007 seeking conversion of leasehold rights into freehold of Nazul Land situated at Mohalla Hasanganj Par Ward Nishatganj, Lucknow which was conveyed through the letter dated 1.10.2009 issued by the opposite party No. 2/Nazul Officer, Lucknow.
3. In the PIL, the petitioners therein prayed for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 not to grant permission for conversion of leasehold rights to freehold rights owned by the respondent No. 3 and therefore, we vide order dated 19.04.2019 directed for listing of PIL along with Misc. Bench No. 12081 of 2009.
4. Facts are similar and identical in both the writ petitions, therefore, they were heard together and are being disposed of by passing the common order.
5. Briefly stated the facts are that after 1857, pursuant to Lord Canning's Notifications, the survey proceedings in order to identify the persons occupying the land started and this survey stood concluded by 1862 when the settlement map and Khasra were notified under the authority of the then Government. During the survey, it was found that there were abandoned sites or the Estates of the people who did not return to occupy it and such abandoned Estates were treated as Nazul property for being provided back to the people on lease as per Nazul Policy. In 1862, the first settlement relating to the land in Lucknow came into effect. The Nazul Department of the then Government of United Provinces granted lease in respect of the land admeasuring 72 Bigha 16 Biswa 11 Biswansi and 18 Kachwansi situated in Purwa Imam Baksh Mohalla Hasanganj Par situated in Municipality of Lucknow to M/s. Upper India Couper Paper Mils Company Ltd. The said lease was duly acknowledged by a registered Lease Deed dated 2nd May, 1944 executed by the Government of United Provinces in the Nazul Department. The period of lease commenced with effect from the first day of the month of April, 1942. The yearly rent fixed was Rs. 3,641 and annas 8 only. The aggregate period of lease is ninety years subject to the enhancement of lease rent by 50% each on expiry of thirty years. The lease was granted for building purpose.
6. For the purposes of disposal of building site in the city of Lucknow relating to Nazul land, the Nazul Officer, Lucknow has been acting on behalf of earlier Government of United Provinces now the Government of Uttar Pradesh. The lease in respect of the entire land was executed by the Nazul Officer on behalf of the Government of United Provinces in the Nazul Department for building purposes in favour of UIC. By virtue of the Government Orders issued by the State Government of Uttar Pradesh, in Lucknow the Vice Chairman, LDA was made as its designated authority (Special Nazul Officer on behalf of the State Government) to deal with the matters relating to the conversion of leasehold rights into freehold relating to Nazul Land.
7. The original lessee, after expiry of initial period of 30 years which came to an end sometime in the year 1972, prayed for renewal of the lease and they had deposited the enhanced premium of the annual rent and further amount towards premium of enhanced rent before expiry of the period of the span of second 30 years. In fact, it is admitted to the respondents also that the requisite premium has already been deposited for the period upto the year 2032 i.e., the entire tenure of the lease. The lease itself contemplates the occasion wherein there may be an assignment an
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
