Alok Sharma, J. - (1.) ALL the aforesaid petitions involve a common question of law and therefore are being decided by this common judgment. The facts in SBCWP No. 4180/2013, titled Smt. Savitri Devi & Anr. Vs. The Raj. Tourism Development Corp. Ltd., Jaipur & Ors., are being taken as the lead case for the reason that the respondent -The Rajasthan Tourism Development Corporation Ltd., Jaipur (hereinafter 'RTDC') being the contesting party has filed a detailed reply in the said petition in justification of its decision not to renew the licences granted to the petitioners following the expiry of their licence period in respect of each of them. The facts of the case are that following an advertisement by the RTDC, as the owner of the Rajasthan Tourist Bungalow, Jhunjhunu, licences for a period of three years, to set up counter for the sale of specified wares within RTDC's premises were given out to each of the petitioners under the letters dated 06.02.2010. Identical licence agreements were thereafter executed on 29.03.2010. A copy of an such licence -qua the petitioner Savitri Devi has been filed as annexure -3 to the writ petition. In terms of clause 3 of the licence agreement aforesaid, it was specifically provided that the licensor -RTDC would be in actual possession of the site in respect of which licence was being issued and the licensee would be entitled only to use the said site for the purpose of setting up a Gents' Parlor. It was also provided that the licensor, aside of having actual possession of the licensed site, would have the right to oversee the use of the licensed premises and carry out the necessary inspections when required. It was further provided that the licensee would be obliged to follow the directions issued by the licensor from time to time including any direction to relocate in respect whereof the licensee would have no right to object on any ground whatsoever. It was then provided that the term of the licence would be three years commencing 01.04.2010 and for the duration of the licence, the licensed premises would only be operated and used between 6:00 am to 10:00 pm each day. Condition No. 14 of the licence agreement dated 29.03.2010 specifically provided that at the end of the licence period, the licensee would cease to have any right whatsoever over the licensed premises and so also in the event the license were to be revoked earlier. Condition No. 17 of the licence agreement recorded the covenant that the licensee would have no interest in the licenced site except to use it strictly in terms of the licence agreement. Condition No. 18 provided that the licensor would have the right to revoke the licence at any time without any reason if directed by the Managing Director of RTDC. Condition No. 24 required that following the revocation of the licence or expiry of the licence period whichever was earlier, counters set up by the licensee on the licensed premises would be removed within 48 hours. Following the licence agreement dated 29.03.2010, the petitioners appear to have set up counters on the site/s in respect of which the licences were issued by the RTDC.
(2.) VIDE letter dated 01.10.2012, the General Manager (F&B), RTDC informed the Manager, RTDC Tourist Bungalow, Jhunjhunu that subsequent to the expiry of the licence period of the sites in issue in respect of which licences were issued, the site were to be kept vacant. This entailed in effect a direction that the licences issued to the petitioners and others similarly situate were not to be renewed subsequent to the expiry of operating/current licence period/s. The petitioners are aggrieved of the letter dated 01.10.2012 primarily on the ground that the said decision is contrary to the RTDC's own policy of 01.06.2008 whereunder a decision had been taken that after expiry of licence period in respect of licence issued in the first instance after an open auction, as in the case of the petitioners, the licence period would be further extended for a period of eight years on the condition of the licence fee being enhanced 20% in the first year following the expiry of the licence and thereafter on yearly enhancement of the fee -as provided -upto eight years. It has been submitted that albeit the Chairman & Managing Director of RTDC has indeed been conferred the discretion under the very said policy decision dated 01.06.2008 not to allow extension and put the sites to auction afresh, there was no good cause/ground with the Chairman & Managing Director of RTDC to invoke his discretion and not renew the licences issued to the petitioners under the agreement dated 29.03.2010 for a further period of eight years with enhancements in licence fees as provided for under the policy. It has been submitted that the petitioners have expanded substantial amounts in setting up the counters on the licenced sites and in the event the licences were not to be arbitrarily renewed in spite of a specific provision with regard thereof under the policy decision dated 01.06.2008, the petitioners would not only lose their capital investment in the counters constructed over the licensed site, but also be denied their right to earn a livelihood. It has been submitted that RTDC generates very substantial amounts from the licence fee paid by the petitioners and other similarly situated licencees and non -renewal of all licences at the RTDC Tourist Bungalow, Jhunjhunu is also contrary to public interest and occasioned by the mere whims and fancies of the Chairman & Managing Director of RTDC who is actuated in his action not so much by any reason of pubic interest or benefit to RTDC, but only by a desire to cause loss and damage to some of the petitioners who belong to a different political dispensation. And thereafter to give out the licences to his favoured persons. It has been submitted that the petitioners have already deposited the enhanced licence fee by post dated monthly cheques for the period 01.04.2013 to 31.03.2014. It has also been submitted that after having raised "Pakka" construction, necessary for setting up the counters, the petitioners have gained reputation and goodwill in the area which would be wholly negated and wasted in the event the petitioners were to be denied renewal of their licenses and required to vacate the present licensed premises.
(3.) REPLY to the writ petition has been filed by the respondent -RTDC. It has been stated that in an identical case, i.e. SBCWP No. 1557/1994 (Om Prakash Gupta Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.), where the licensee had sought renewal through the intervention of the Court, this Court had held that the issue of extension of the licence period was not a matter which could be treated as mandatory entailing a direction for extension and it was held that the issue of extension of licence period was a matter of discretion of the Chairman & Managing Director (apparently RTDC). It was held that it was not for the Court to substitute its discretion for that of Chairman & Managing Director of RTDC and direct him to extend the term of the licence granted to the petitioner in the said writ petition. It has been submitted that a legally correct view in a similar matter having already been taken by this Court with regard to the lack of sustainability of a writ seeking extension of licence period, this Court has no occasion to take a different view on the same issue and the writ petitions should therefore be dismissed in limine on this count alone. It has been then submitted that the right of renewal is not a vested or accrued right, but a licensee can only be entitled to the privilege of extension by the licensor, if the licensor in the fair exercise of its discretion is satisfied that in the obtaining facts and circumstances of a case, extension of licence is in its interest. It has been further submitted that aside of the extension of the licence period being a matter wholly within the discretion of the licensor, the petitioner No. 1, Smt. Savitri Devi, is in breach of the conditions of licence agreement dated 29.03.2010 inasmuch as while she was allotted counter No. 1 at the RTDC Tourist Bungalow, Jhunjhunu for establishing a Gents Parlor under the said licence agreement, she has proceeded to combine her business with respondent No. 2, Pratap Singh, who was allotted counter No. 2 for sale of general items under the licence agreement dated 29.03.2010. It has been submitted that under the terms and conditions of licence agreement, it was covenanted between the parties that counters for which licences had been issued were specifically to be used only for the items indicated and services detailed in the respective licences and there was a complete prohibition against the transfer of the licence or a different user being put thereto. It has been also submitted that the petitioners on the contrary, in contravention of the terms and conditions of the licence agreement, were found on an inspection of 29.03.2013 to be running counter Nos. 1 and 2 jointly and counter No. 2 licensed to petitioner No. 2, Pratap Singh, in spite of being allowed only for sale general items was being used for running of the Gents' Parlor. It has been submitted that this fact by itself constitutes a breach of the conditions of the licences granted to the petitioners entitling the licensor to forthwith revoke the license on this ground. It has been stated that consequently the petitioners cannot in any event of the matter have any case for the renewal of their licences. It has further been submitted that the counters licensed to the petitioners as also other counters existing in the compound of the RTDC Tourist Bungalow at Jhunjhunu have been found to obstruct the entire view of the Tourist Bungalow itself owing to which the fundamental business of RTDC i.e. of boarding and lodging to the tourist has been adversely affected resulting in poor occupancy and obviously resultant losses. It has been submitted that the counters licenced on site also cause nuisance as they have unexpectedly partaken the character of a "thadi market" where the local persons crowd the licenced counters turning away potential visitors to the RTDC Tourist Bungalow at Jhunjhunu. Photograph demonstrating a completely restricted view of the RTDC Tourist Bungalow, Jhunjhunu due to the licenced counters has been annexed to the writ petition as annexure -R/1.;