RATANCHAND & SONS RETAIL OUTLET Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS
LAWS(RAJ)-2015-9-214
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on September 16,2015

Ratanchand And Sons Retail Outlet Appellant
VERSUS
State Of Rajasthan And Ors Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) In both the petitions, the petitioners have challenged the same impugned notice dated 13.05.2014 issued by the respondent Municipal Council, Dholpur and hence, they are being decided by this common order.
(2.) The writ petition being No.5897/2014 has been filed by the petitioner M/s. Ratan Chand & Sons through its Proprietor Shalini Garg through her Power of Attorney Holder Shri Sunil Kumar Garg, wherein it has been alleged inter alia that the petitioner is the proprietorship firm engaged in the business of selling petroleum products and is operating a retail outlet of petroleum product at G.T. Road, Dholpur as a dealer of respondent No.3 Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited. The further case of the petitioner is that the said outlet has been installed on the land admeasuring 2400 Square feet owned by the petitioner firm, and the rest of the land admeasuring 4130 Square feet was leased out land by the respondent Municipal Council in favour of the respondent Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited. According to the petitioner, originally the said land admeasuring 4130 Sq. feet was leased out by the Municipal Board, Dholpur in the year 1953 to the erstwhile Burmah Shell Oil Storage and Distribution Company of India Limited which has been subsequently converted as Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited. The said lease was renewed for a period of 5 years vide the letter dated 8.5.1958 (Annex.2) and was further renewed for ten years vide the letter dated 26.8.1963 (Annex.3). According to the petitioner, the rent was being deposited continuously by the respondent Oil Company till 2012 as per Annexure-4. The further case of the petitioner is that originally Shri Ratanchand was the sole proprietor of the petitioner firm, however, after his death, Smt. Shalini Garg became the sole proprietor by virtue of the will dated 29.10.2004 executed by him. According to the petitioner, the respondent No.2 Municipal Council without affording any opportunity of hearing and without following the principles of natural justice issued the notice dated 13.5.2014 (Annexure/8) to the petitioner informing the petitioner that the tenancy of the petitioner on the land admeasuring 40 x 60 equivalent to 2400 Sq. feet had already stood terminated by efflux of time, and therefore, the possession of the said land be handed over within three days of the receipt of the notice. The said notice has been challenged by the petitioner by way of the present petition. The said petition has been resisted by the respondent No.1 and 2 by filing reply contending interalia that the petition was throughly misconceived and not maintainable in the eye of law. According to the said respondents, late Shri Ratanchand had submitted an application for allotting the land admeasuring 40 x 80 feet for installing a retail outlet however, he was granted the land admeasuring 40x 60 = 2400 Sq. feet on lease on 28.3.1963 and, therefore, the petitioner had wrongly stated that the petitioner was the owner of the said piece of land. It is further contended by the respondents that the lease deed executed in favour of Burmah Shell Oil Storage and Distribution Company of India Limited was in respect of different piece of land and the petitioner had tried to mislead the Court by mixing up two lands. The impugned notice was issued only in respect of the land admeasuring 40 x 60 equivalent to 2400 Sq. feet originally alloted on lease to Shri Ratanchand, which was adjacent to the land leased out to Burmah Shell Oil Storage and Distribution Company of India Limited. According to the respondents, the period of lease in respect of the land granted to the petitioner firm having already expired and there being no application made by the petitioner firm in respect of the said lease period, the said lease had stood terminated and, therefore, the impugned notice was issued. The petitioner has filed the rejoinder to the reply filed by the respondents.
(3.) The writ petition being No.5901/2014 has been filed by the petitioner Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited challenging the same notice dated 13.5.2014 issued by the Municipal Council, Dholpur to M/s. Ratanchand Petrol Pump i.e. the petitioner of the petition No.5897/2014. The said petition has also been resisted by the respondents by filing the reply to which the petitioner has filed the rejoinder.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.