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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 8653

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Ramesh Sinha, CJ, Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J
Gulab Jain – Appellant
Versus
Steel Authority Of India – Respondent
WA No. 299 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Anmol Verma
For the Respondents: Prasun Bhaduri, Pranjal Agrawal

A public authority has the competence to prescribe fresh, uniform terms and conditions for the renewal of leases, as renewal is considered a fresh grant rather than an automatic extension of the original lease; judicial interference is restricted to cases of manifest arbitrariness, discrimination, or constitutional violation.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 14 - Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 - Transfer of Property Act - Section 116 - Lease renewal - Public Authority - Policy decision - Validity - Modification of lease terms including renewal charges and service charges - Appellants contested the constitutionality and validity of the board resolutions for renewal conditions - Court held that public authorities have the competence to frame uniform policies for lease renewals - Policy decisions are not subject to judicial interference unless arbitrary, discriminatory or violative of constitutional guarantees - Renewal is a fresh grant and not an automatic extension of the original lease - No vested right for renewal exists on old terms. (Paras 14-20)

Facts of the case:
The appellant, a long-standing lessee of a plot in a township, challenged the dismissal of a writ petition regarding the validity of revised lease renewal terms imposed by a public authority. The appellant argued that the unilateral increase in charges and new conditions for renewal were unconstitutional and contrary to the original lease deed.

Findings of Court:
The court upheld the legality of the policy decision, affirming that the authority is competent to determine terms for fresh lease renewals and that judicial review in such matters is limited.

Issues: Whether the board resolution imposing new terms for lease renewal is unconstitutional and whether a lessee has a vested right to renewal on existing terms.

Ratio Decidendi: Public authorities functioning as landlords possess the right to frame policies for property management and lease renewals, and such commercial policy decisions are valid absent manifest arbitrariness or violation of fundamental rights.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

Table of Content
1. summary of facts regarding disputed lease renewal terms and board resolutions. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)
2. appellants contentions regarding policy unconstitutionality and alleged perversity of the lower court order. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
3. court holds that public authorities may frame uniform renewal policies; renewal is a fresh grant. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
4. consistency in adjudication with analogous cases confirms dismissal of meritless appeals. (Para 20 , 21 , 22)

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, C.J.

15.04.2026

1. Heard Mr. Anmol Verma, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Prasun Bhaduri, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the respondents/State and Mr. Pranjal Agrawal, learned counsel, appearing for respondent/BSP.

2. This intra Court appeal has been filed against the impugned order dated 31.10.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPC No. 2337 of 2025 (B. K. Ghosh v. Steel Authority of India & Othrs) and batch of writ petitions, whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the said batch of writ petitions.

3. Brief facts, necessary for disposal of this appeal, are that the writ petitioner / appellant is long-standing lessees of plots situated in the Bhilai Steel Plant Township, having acquired the same either directly or through their predecessors-in-title pursuant to registered sale lease deeds execute during the years 1989-1991, each for a fixed tenure of 30/33 years. The relevant terms of the lease deed are as follows :

i) Enhancement of ground rent at the time of lease renewal shall not exceed 50% of the existing rent;

ii) No other charges, including lease premium or “renewal charges”, are payable

iii) the lease deeds bind the parties to the conditions and obligations stipulated therein.

4. On 21st and 25th of July, 2008, the respondent No.1 conducted a meeting of its Board of Directors, wherein various modifications were undertaken in the terms and conditions for allotment of land in Steel Plants, including the allotments which had already been made and would be due for renewal in the future. In the said meeting it was decided by the Steel Authority of India Limited “SAIL” that henceforth any lease will be renewed subject to the following conditions :-

- Payment of Renewal Charges to be calculated as 25% of the Applicable Land Premium prevailing on the date of renewal.

- Grounds rent to be 1% of the Applicable Land Premium.

- Service Charge to be 2% of the Applicant Land Premium.

5. The Shopkeepers were made aware of the decision taken by the Board of SAIL dated 21.07.2008, whereby the terms of the lease due for renewal were unilaterally changed. As a consequence of the sudden and drastic increase in the charges to be paid for renewal of the Lease, the Shopkeepers approached various authorities, including the District Collector for redressal of their grievances. In furtherance of one such meeting between the District Administration and the Management of Bhilai Steel Plant a letter was issued by the District Collector, Durg, on 31.07.2019, whereby the management of the Plant was informed that as per the extant rules applicable on the grant of land on lease, any premium or charge is payable only at the time of initial lease agreement and for any subsequent renewal no such premium is to be paid by the Land Holder. The Management of the plant was thereafter directed to act as per the rules and regulations of the State Government. The relevant portion of the said letter are as follows:-

i) Any premium or additional charge is payable only tat the time of initial lease grant.

ii) No premium or extra charges may be imposed at the time of renewal,

iii) The management of the plant was directed to act in accordance with State Government rules and policy.

6. In furtherance of the Collector’s directive, the Chief General Manager (TA) Bhilai Steel Plant, issued a letter dated 23.11.2019 to the Corporate Office of SAIL reiterated that charging premium

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