Samapti Chatterjee, J. - (1.) Issue to be determined : Whether considering the subsequent development Court can extent the contractual period agreed between the parties in a writ proceedings:
(2.) The case in brief is as follows: - - "On 27th November, 1998 the Plot No. 167, Block -IB, Sector -III, Salt Lake, Kolkata -700 106 was leased out in favour of the petitioner but possession was handed over to the petitioner on 23rd June, 1999. In the said Lease Deed the petitioner was permitted to construct 20th storied hotel over the said plot of land. Certainly on 10th September, 2009 the respondent No. 2 issued a letter alleging violation of Clause II (8) of the Lease Deed by the petitioner. Challenging the same the petitioner moved a writ petition before this Hon'ble Court being W.P No. 18790 (W) of 2009. Thereafter the order dated 10th September, 2009 issued by the respondent No. 2 was set aside by this Hon'ble Court on 15th March, 2010. On 30th April, 2010 the respondent No. 2 in relaxation of Clause II (6) (a) granted three years time to the petitioner for completion of the said hotel project work. The petitioner again on 16th August, 2010 filed an application before the respondent No. 2 praying for grant of written permission for mortgage. Since no permission was granted by the respondent, therefore, without finding any alternative the petitioner moved before this Hon'ble Court and the Hon'ble Court on 18th February, 2011 at the time of disposing that writ petition being W.P No. 22 (W) of 2011 directed the respondent No. 2 and 3 to grant permission to the petitioner for creation of mortgage. Thereafter pursuant to the order dated 18th February, 2011 on 18th April, 2011 the authority granted permission to the petitioner to mortgage the said property for granting loan for completion of the project work. Since the revalidation of the building plan was about to expire on 20th February, 2012 therefore the petitioner made a representation before the said authority to revalidate the said sanction plan for a further period of five years. Since the said sanction plan was not revalidated by the authority therefore again the petitioner was compelled to approach before this Hon'ble Court by filing writ petition being W.P No. 11535 (W) of 2013 and the said writ petition was disposed of by this Hon'ble Court on 30th April, 2013 thereby directing the respondent authority to consider and disposed of the writ petition of the petitioner within eight weeks. Thereafter on 25th November, 2013 the respondent No. 5 passed a reasoned order thereby extending the validity of the sanctioned building plan for a further period of three years. Immediately after revalidated the said sanction plan the petitioner on 3rd April, 2014 applied before the respondent No. 3 for further relaxation of Clause II (6) (a) of the Lease Deed. Since that application was not disposed of by the respondent authority hence, the present writ petition."
(3.) Mr. Sakti Nath Mukherjee, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that it is an admitted fact that the respondent authorities are having ample power to extent the validity of the Lease Deed as well as the validity of the sanctioned building plan under the law. But the respondent authorities this time failed to relax the Clause II (6) (a) of the lease period.;