The court established that the requisition of property under the Disaster Management Act 2005 entitles the affected party to compensation as per Section 66, irrespective of the actual usage of the premises.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J.

Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the Court has passed the following judgment:-

By filing this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

“I. To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorati to quash the impugned order/communication dated 05.07.2021, passed by the respondent no. 3, whereby payment is denied to the petitioner which is required to be paid as a result of acquisition of 30 rooms of the petitioner's hotel, along with staff.

II. To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to pay a sum of rupees Rs. 12,25,500/- as dues towards the payment of acquisition of 30 rooms, for 43 days, of the petitioner’s hotel along with hotel staff, further to direct the respondents to pay an interest @18% per annum on the above said amount from the date of its being due (i.e. 08.06.2021) till its final payment.”

2. The facts of the case are not disputed at this stage and it can be chronologically described as follows :-

(i). On 26.04.2021, the petitioner’s hotel, namely, Ashok Hotel, situated in Tallital, Nainital, was requisitioned by the order of respondent no.2, i.e., District Magistrate, Nainital, under the Disaster Management Act 2005 and Epidemic Disease Act 1897. On 01.06.2021, the petitioner submitted a representation before respondent no.3 and Chief Medical Officer Nainital, requesting them to release his hotel because due to decrease in the Covid-19 cases even the Government facility (TRC Mallital) was almost vacant and in such circumstances continuing with the requisition of the petitioner's hotel will lead to unnecessary burdon on the state exchequer. He further demanded a sum of Rs 10,26,000/- for the dues towards 39 days of acquisition of 30 rooms of the petitioner's hotel. On 03.06.2021, in consideration of the request for releasing the hotel of the petitioner, respondent no. 3 passed an order on 03.06.2021, the same was received to the petitioner on 08.06.2021.

(ii) On 11.06.2021, the petitioner moved a representation, before respondent no.3 along with respondent no.2 and Chief Medical Officer, Nainital for releasing Rs.12,25,500/- raising a bill for requisition, of the petitioner's hotel, for 43 days at the rate of Rs. 950/- for per room per day from 26.04.2021 to 07.06.2021.

(iii) On 02.07.2021 he moved another representation, before respondent no. 3 along with respondent no. 2 and Chief Medical Officer, District Nainital. However, no amounts were paid to the petitioner. On 05.07.2021, the petitioner sought information under the Right to Information Act, 2005 from respondent no. 2 on the action taken on his representation. Respondent no. 3, on 05.06.2021, communicated the petitioner that the demand of Rs. 12,25,500/- has been rejected as no Covid-19 infected person were kept in the requisitioned rooms of the petitioner's hotel and the payment for aforesaid period of acquisition could not be made. On 28.10.2020, the respondents were again approached, but they did not pay any amount to the petitioner.

(iv) On 23.07.2021, the writ petition has been filed.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed by respondent nos. 2 and 3. In paragraph no. 5, the respondents state that in view of the Covid-19 Pandemic situation and in order to check and control its spread, vide office order dated 26-04-2020 issued by respondent no. 2 i.e. District Magistrate, Nainital, as per the provisions of Government Order No. 319/USDMA-792 (2020) TC dated 29-3-2020, Ashoka Hotel Tallital, Nainital, with its staff was occupied by the District administration of Nainital District. As per point no. 2 of the said G.O. dated 29-3-2020 for providing quarantine & isolation accommodation facility for Covid positive patients at the fixed rate of Rs. 950/- per room per day was provisioned. It is further pleaded that, as per point no. 3 of the said G.O., for providing meals to the covid positive patients a maximum amount up to a limit of R