M/s Shakti Industries vs Union Of India And Others

Ramesh Ranganathan, CJ

Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar Chauhan, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri D.C.S. Rawat, learned Standing Counsel for the Union of India and Sri Rakesh Thapliyal, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Corporation.

The application to condone the delay of eight days in filing the special appeal is not opposed and is, accordingly, ordered. The delay is condoned.

With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this appeal is disposed of at the stage of admission.

This appeal is preferred against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 2248 of 2018 dated 25.10.2018. The appellant herein is aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge to the limited extent that liberty was granted to the respondent-Corporation to reclaim the land, which had been given to the appellant-writ petitioner, in case it came to the conclusion that the appellant-writ petitioner had violated the terms and conditions of the lease-deed. The learned Single Judge also made it clear that the parties would always be at liberty to invoke the arbitration clause, if so required.

Sri Pradeep Kumar Chauhan, learned counsel for the appellant-writ petitioner, would submit that the order of the learned Single Judge, giving liberty to SIDCUL to reclaim the land, has been construed by the respondents as a direction, and they are of the view that the said order obligated them to reclaim the land.

The order of the learned Single Judge is clear. Liberty was granted to SIDCUL to reclaim the land, given to the appellant-writ petitioner, only in case SIDCUL came to the conclusion that the terms and conditions of the lease-deed had been violated by the appellant-writ petitioner. The said order of the learned Single Judge cannot be construed as a mandamus to SIDCUL to reclaim the land. The order under appeal merely enables SIDCUL, if it is satisfied that the terms and conditions of the lease-deed have been violated, to take action against the appellant-writ petitioner to reclaim the land. The apprehension expressed by Sri Pradeep Kumar Chauhan, learned counsel for the appellant-writ petitioner, is, therefore, unfounded.

Subject to the aforesaid observations, the appeal fails and is, accordingly, dismissed.