Ashok Bhushan, J. - (1.) We have heard Sri V.B. Upadhyay, senior advocate, assisted by Sri Manish Goyal, advocate for the petitioner, Sri Siddharth Shanker Ray, senior advocate for respondent No. 4, Sri A.K. Mishra, advocate for respondent No. 3 and Sri Chandra Shekhar Singh, standing counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Affidavits between the parties have been exchanged, with the consent of the parties the writ petition is being finally decided.
(2.) The writ petition, as originally filed, contains following relief : (i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the Government order on the basis of which the respondents are trying to transfer the legally acquired property of the petitioner in favour of respondent No. 3 and thereafter to quash the said order ; (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to provide records relating to the alleged transfer of the property in favour of respondent No. 3 ; (iii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of prohibition commanding the respondent No. 3 not to alienate the property further on the basis of orders passed In its favour by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 ; (iv) issue any other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case ; (v) to award costs to the petitioner. By an order of this Court dated 1st August, 2001, petitioner has been permitted to add two more relief (ia and ib) praying for quashing the allotment order in favour of respondent No. 4 by respondent No. 3 dated 12.6.2001 and for quashing the orders dated 13th June, 2001 and 14th June, 2001.
(3.) Facts of the case, as emerge from pleadings of the parties, briefly, are; Rampur State vide letter dated 22nd February, 1942 agreed to grant a lease of land, measuring 24 bighas 8 biswas, to M/s. Rampur Maize Products Limited, Rampur for setting up an industry. By lease executed on 17th June, 1949 terms and conditions of lease were written down. The lease deed provided that deed is for a period of 30 years with effect from 22nd February, 1942, renewable on same terms and conditions at the option of Company for a further period of 30 years. The lease deed further provided that State shall on the written request of the Company within one calendar year before the expiration of the first period of 30 years grant to the Company a lease of the said premises for a further period of thirty years. The lease deed further provided that should the company on the termination of lease after the full period of 60 years wish to renew this lease for a further period on terms and conditions as to be mutually agreed and should the State not agree to extend the lease then the Company will have the right to and option to acquire the full ownership of the said piece of land on payment of Rs. 500 per acre or to remove or pull down all erections and machineries. The said lease property was mortgaged to Bharat Fire and General Insurance Company, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'Bharat Insurance Company') and on failure to pay the mortgage money, the Bharat Insurance Company took possession of all mortgaged properties and purchased the same in a court auction held on 16th March, 1961. Bharat Insurance Company entered into an agreement with the Governor of Uttar Pradesh on 7th of June, 1961 by which agreement Governor of Uttar Pradesh agreed to sell to the Bharat Insurance Company the land as described in schedule with certain conditions. The agreement provided that purchaser shall pay Rs. 7,625 being the initial payment at the rate of Rs. 500 per acre for the entire land. At the time of execution of the agreement and after the initial payment purchaser shall find a party within two years of the date of the agreement who can restart the said maize factory or can start any other industry at the premises and work the said industry for a period of at least 10 years. If the purchaser would be able to run the factory or start any other industry on the said premises, the seller shall convey the said land as freehold to the purchaser after the expiry of 10 years on the consideration of the payment of Rs. 7,625 already paid. The agreement further provided that if purchaser would fail to find a party for restarting the maize factory or would fail to start any other factory within two years and/or would fail to carry on and run the said industry for a period of at least 10 years, the purchaser/shall liable to pay to the Vendor full market price of the land prevailing at the time of the expiry of the said period of 10 years. Agreement lastly provided that until the freehold rights, as aforesaid, are granted to the purchaser, the purchaser shall continue to observe and perform all the covenants of earlier lease. On 21st November, 1970 Bharat Insurance Company wrote to State Government that it could not restart the maize factory or any other industry, hence is liable to pay full market value of the land. It prayed that free hold rights be granted. On 17th February, 1971, Bharat Insurance Company again wrote to the State Government to renew the lease for a further period of 30 years. The General Insurance Business (Nationalization) Act, 1972 was passed in pursuance of which a scheme was notified by the Central Government by which Bharat Insurance Company was merged with Oriental Fire and General Insurance Company Limited. The State Government wrote to the Central Government on 10th May, 1974 asking for the views of the Central Government on the transfer of the land in view of he fact that the Government of India is now successor of Bharat Insurance Company. Letter dated 11th February, 1976 was written by the Central Government to the State Government to consider favourably the request of M/s. Oriental Insurance Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'Oriental Insurance Company') for renewal of the lease for a further period of 30 years. The State Government further took a decision to add certain additional conditions for proposed renewal of the lease, letter dated 17th April, 1978 was issued in that regard. The State Government vide letter dated 17th April, 1978 addressed to the Commissioner and Director of Industries, U.P. stated that additional condition be added to the effect that renewal shall be for 30 years with effect from 22nd February, 1972 and Oriental Insurance Company shall not be entitled to get a sale deed executed in his favour as per agreement dated 17th June, 1961. It further provided that if the lessee in the prescribed period does not use the land for the specified object then the State Government in the public interest shall have power to take the land in its possession and power. The Oriental Insurance Company vide its letter dated 2nd March, 1982 objected to the addition of the aforesaid condition in the proforma of lease deed. It was prayed that renewal be granted at the earliest. Rampur Distillery Limited made an application on 23rd September, 1982 to the State Government for allotting the land to it. A letter dated 21st May, 2001 written by Secretary. Industry to the Chairman of Oriental Insurance Company communicated that land having not been utilized for industrial purposes, a decision has been taken by the State Government to transfer the land to U.P. State Industrial Development Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'U.P.S.I.D.C.') which will make the land available by lease for industrial purposes. The letter further stated that in case the petitioner desires. It may make an application for allotment of land to U.P.S.I.D.C. An Government order dated 26th May, 2001 was Issued to above effect. An application dated 7th June, 2001 was sent by respondent No. 4 to U.P.S.I.D.C. praying for allotment of land. On 8th June, 2001, the Collector took possession of land in question under the orders issued by the State Government. On 11th June, 2001, the petitioner wrote to the Collector requesting him to inform the orders and reasons for action of Collector in trying to dispossess the petitioner. On 12th June, 2001, U.P.S.I.D.C. allotted the land in question in reference to application of respondent No. 4 dated 7th June, 2001. On 13th June, 2001 possession is claimed to have been handed over by U.P.S.I.D.C. to respondent No. 4, The writ petition was filed in this Court which was taken on 21st June, 2001 on which date this Court passed an interim order directing for maintaining status-quo over the land in dispute. A supplementary affidavit was filed by the petitioner dated 21st June, 2001 annexing the copy of the letter dated 21st May, 2001 of the Secretary, Industry. It has further been stated in the affidavit that action of the respondents in taking a decision is in hot haste and allotment of premises to respondent No. 3 in a short span and thereafter allotting the same to respondent No. 4 smacks of arbitrariness and extraneous consideration. It was further pleaded that before allotting the premises neither any public notice was issued nor any tender as invited and the entire exercise has been undertaken only to give benefit to respondent No. 4. Petitioner was permitted to amend the pleading of the writ petition by order of this Court dated 1st August, 2001 by which relief (ia and ib) was permitted to be added as noted above.;