The court held that the lessee is entitled to the provision of an approach road as stipulated in the lease deed, justifying waivers of interest and zero period until compliance by the lessor.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Shri Abdhesh Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1 and Sri Swapnil Kumar, learned counsel for Respondents No.2 & 3.

2. The petitioner is a private limited company engaged in the development of residential and commercial projects and has filed the present writ petition, seeking inter-alia the following reliefs;

" i. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the Impugned Disposal Order No. 3743/SIDC/1A/BGA-A/SRJ-C (Vol.II) dated 23.02.2018 passed by the Managing Director UPSIDC (Annexure-P/ 1);

ii. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the Impugned Demand Notice No.750-52 dated 22.07.2020 issued by the UPSIDC (Annexure-P/2);

iii. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the Impugned Letter No.2017 dated 15.09.2020 issued by the UPSIDC (ANNEXURE-P/3);

iv. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent not to realize the lease premium as well as lease rent from the Petitioner from the date of allotment till completion of the construction of the 60 meters wide approach road and other infrastructural facilities as provided in Clause 16 of the Lease Deed;

v. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent that period in issue i.e. the period starting from the date of allotment of the subject plot till the said proposed 60-meter road giving access to the subject plot be declared as zero period;

vi. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent to grant waiver of interest for the period starting from the date of allotment of the subject plot to the Petitioner till the said proposed 60-meter road giving access to the subject plot is finally constructed and the payment made by the Petitioner to the Respondent be adjusted towards the premium of the subject plot;

vii. Issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondent to allow the further period of 7 years for undertaking construction, to commence from the date of the completion of the construction of 60-meter-wide road;

3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that a Plot No.BGH-A1, Housing Sector, Surajpur Site-C (Extension) Phase- 1, Greater Noida, was allotted to them and pursuant to the said allotment, a lease deed was executed between the petitioner and the U.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. (UPSIDC) on 11.04.2011. Apparently, as per the terms of the lease deed, the petitioner was required to deposit Rs.4,12,52,970/- towards provisional premium and the remaining amount of Rs.23,37,67,830/- was to be deposited in 16 instalments of each Rs.1,46,10,440/.

4. Thereafter, the petitioner was served upon a notice dated 16.06.2017, requiring them to deposit a sum of Rs.17,09,92,750/- by 01.07.2017 failing which, action was proposed to be taken in terms of the lease deed. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is entitled to grant of "zero period" and waiver of interest till the 60 meter vide approach road, as shown in the site plan along with Time extension of seven years for construction. The petitioner in that regard had filed a representation dated 25.05.2017 before the Regional Manager of UPSIDC, which was not being decided. In the said background, the petitioner, filed Writ (C) No.35584 of 2017, which was disposed of, vide order dated 16.08.2017 (Annexure No.15 to the present writ petition) by requiring the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.5.00 Crores with the respondent-UPSIDC, within a period of two months to show its bonafide and the UPSIDC was required to take a decision on the said representation, within one month.

5. Counsel for the petitioner contends that in pursuance of the order dated 16.08.2017, the petitioner deposited Rs.5.00 Crores, to show its bonafide, however, the Managing Director of the respondent-UPSIDC took a mechanical