Lease cancellation without notice violates principles of natural justice, and the petitioners, as bona fide purchasers, are entitled to protection under promissory estoppel.

CAV JUDGMENT

Date : 15-07-2025

Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner in the present writ application seeks the following main relief:

“(i)To quash the order dated 18 May 2004, as contained in Letter No. 603(6)/Revision (Annexure 13), along with the subsequent Memo No. 2273/Rev., Patna dated 14 September 2004 (Annexure 13-1), on the grounds that there has been no breach of the terms of the lease deed dated 19 June 1966.

(ii) Consequent to the relief sought for in prayer (i), to direct the concerned authorities, including the District Collector, to consider the petitioners’ case—being the recognized successors-in-interest of the original lessee/society—for renewal of the lease in accordance with the rights conferred under Clause 15 of the original lease deed, and to grant such renewal strictly in accordance with law.

(iii) To grant any other relief or pass such further orders as may be deemed just, fit, and proper in the facts and circumstances of the petitioner’s case.”

3. The present writ petition has been instituted by a group of flat allottees and members of the Midway Apartment Co- operative Housing Society Limited, Patna, seeking to assail the legality and validity of the purported cancellation of a lease dated 19.06.1966 in respect of Khas Mahal land bearing Plot No. 4, Circle No. 6, Tauzi Nos. 862/863, Holding No. 56, measuring 0.234 acres, situated near Dakbungalow Road, Patna. The petitioners further seek issuance of appropriate directions for considering the petitioners' case for renewal of the lease and protection of their right to peaceful possession and enjoyment of their residential flats, constructed pursuant to express governmental permission.

4. The origin of the property in dispute traces back to a lease granted by the Collector, Patna, on behalf of the Government of Bihar in favour of one Ram Chandra Bhaduri on 01.04.1916, which was subsequently transferred with due approval to Smt. Taru Balla Devi in 1932. Following a family settlement in 1956, the southern portion of the land devolved upon Devi Rani Devi and her successors, who were granted a renewed lease for 50 years w.e.f. 01.04.1966, which recognized the previous transfer and family settlement.

Subsequently, the then-lessees, citing financial necessity, sought permission from the competent authority to sell the property to Midway Apartment Co-operative Housing Society Limited for the purpose of constructing a multistoried residential apartment. Vide Memo No. 2489 dated 08.12.1989, the Revenue and Land Reforms Department, Government of Bihar, granted specific permission to transfer the land to Midway Apartment Co- operative Housing Society for constructing residential apartments thereon, visualizing provisions for sale of individual flats and execution of lease deeds with new allottees upon expiry of the existing lease.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the impugned action/order of the respondent authorities contained in letter dated 18.05.2004 (Annexure-13) and consequential order/direction contained in letter dated 14.09.2004 (Annexure- 13(i)) of cancelling the lease and resumption of the property in question along with the structures present over the same, is wholly arbitrary, unsustainable in law, and violative of the fundamental principles of natural justice. It is further contended that neither the original lessees nor the petitioner-allottees, who are bona fide purchasers for value, were ever served with any notice or afforded an opportunity of hearing prior to the cancellation of the lease or the resumption of possession. The unilateral action taken by the respondents behind the back of the affected parties, despite their recognized possession and occupation spanning over two decades, is violative o