Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1371 (RAJ)

45 BRTF v. Padmawati Arts Creation Pvt. Ltd.

2019-05-06

PRATAP KRISHNA LOHRA

body2019
ORDER : PRATAP KRISHNA LOHRA, J. 1. By the instant writ petition, under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioners have craved for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari with following order and directions: (i) The order impugned dated 16.11.2018 (Annexure-14) issued by the learned Rent Appellate Tribunal may kindly be declared illegal and same may kindly be quashed and set aside and the order dated; (ii) The miscellaneous application No. CM 01/2018 preferred by the petitioner department before the learned Rent Appellate Tribunal may kindly be allowed as prayed and the order dated 30.05.2015 (Annexure-2) may kindly be modified to the extent of permitting the petitioner department to vacate the rented premises on or before 15.03.2021; (iii) Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper in favour of the petitioner, may kindly be granted and (iv) The cost of writ petition be allowed in favour of the petitioner. 2. The facts apposite for the purpose of this writ petition are that petitioner No. 1, 45 Border Road Task Force (BRTF), is a unit under the Ministry of Defence, deployed in Jodhpur and entrusted with the principal task of looking after construction and maintenance of border roads in the State of Rajasthan. As per petitioners, the organization is taking care of roads connecting borders of India and keep them operational and trafficable at all the times for strengthening defence of the Nation. It is averred that the organization is also involved in upkeep of roads in sensitive and important locations of western border of the Country. Adverting to the lis involved in the matter, it is averred in the writ petition that respondents are owners of huge chunk of land measuring 46981.69 sq.mtrs in the area popularly known as Jalam Vilas, near Paota, Jodhpur. It is further averred that the said area was leased on rent to the petitioner-organization in the year 1976 and since then it is housing various administrative offices of the organization and residential houses of employees of the organization including HQ 45 BRTF Commander’s office, supply office, workshop, administrative department as well as accounts and other departments. Besides that, the leased area is also utilized as Single Living Quarters for approximately 150 employees. The petitioners have also highlighted the importance of the organization on the strength of functions and duties undertaken by it. Besides that, the leased area is also utilized as Single Living Quarters for approximately 150 employees. The petitioners have also highlighted the importance of the organization on the strength of functions and duties undertaken by it. It is also pleaded in the petition that in order to seek eviction from the rented area, respondents moved an application bearing No. 95/2006 under Section 3(IV) and Section 18 of the Rajasthan Rent Control Act, 2001 (for short, ‘Act of 2001’). 3. The petition for eviction came up for consideration before Rent Tribunal, Jodhpur (for short, ‘Tribunal’) and vide its judgment dated 22nd of March, 2010, the same was allowed with a direction to the petitioner-organization to vacate the premises and handover peaceful possession within six months from the date of passing of the order. A direction is further issued by the learned Tribunal to pay rent/mesne profits @ Rs. 5,009 per mensem if the premises are vacated within three months from the date of order, else the respondents would be entitled to receive rent/mesne profits three times of the monthly rent of Rs. 5,009. 4. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order of the learned Tribunal, petitioner-organization preferred an appeal before the Appellate Rent Tribunal (for short, ‘Appellate Tribunal’) under Section 19 of the Act of 2001. During pendency of the appeal, at the behest of petitioner-organization, an application was filed showing its willingness to handover possession of vacant land from the entire rented premises admeasuring 17121 sq.mtr within 30 days with a further request to permit it to vacate the buildings of the rented premises on or before 31st of May, 2018. Upon consideration of the appeal and the application of petitioner-organization, the learned Appellate Tribunal disposed of the main appeal as well as application vide its order dated 30th of May, 2015 in terms of the commitment of petitioner-organization. The learned Appellate Tribunal granted 30 days’ time to the petitioners to handover vacant land situated in the disputed premises to the respondents. Besides that, in terms of the compromise, petitioners were also allowed time upto 15th of March, 2018 to handover possession of remaining land and buildings to the respondents. 5. The learned Appellate Tribunal granted 30 days’ time to the petitioners to handover vacant land situated in the disputed premises to the respondents. Besides that, in terms of the compromise, petitioners were also allowed time upto 15th of March, 2018 to handover possession of remaining land and buildings to the respondents. 5. It so happened that in the interregnum period a proposal was sent to the State Government for allotment of dedicated land to the petitioner-organization for utilizing the same to construct residential quarters of the employees as well as offices of the organization. Pursuant to the proposal, Jodhpur Development Authority (JDA) on 18th of May, 2012 allotted 25 acres of land to the petitioner-organization in Khasra No. 88 of village Badli and the same was registered in the name of petitioner-organization on 11th of January, 2013. 6. Subsequent to the allotment of land by JDA, the petitioner-organization came to know that Rajasthan Rajya Vidhyut Prasaran Nigam Limited (RRVPNL) has already erected high tension electrical line of 220 KV on the allotted land. This sort of situation prompted the petitioner-organization to request RRVPNL to stop further construction, however, no heed was paid to the same. Besides approaching RRVPNL, the petitioner-organization also espoused its grievances before the JDA but its efforts were in vain. 7. When the efforts of the petitioner-organization before RRVPNL and JDA proved abortive, on its behalf a writ petition was filed before this Court, which was registered as S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1829/14. In the writ petition, at the threshold, interim order dated 11th of March, 2014 was passed against RRVPNL not to proceed with installation of high tension lines on the allotted land in question. When the writ petition was pending, administrative as well as financial sanction was issued by the HQ Director General, Border Roads, for construction of a full-fledged complex for troops and their families alongwith offices, workshop etc and a budget to the tune of Rs. 3590.04 lakhs approved. When the writ petition was pending, administrative as well as financial sanction was issued by the HQ Director General, Border Roads, for construction of a full-fledged complex for troops and their families alongwith offices, workshop etc and a budget to the tune of Rs. 3590.04 lakhs approved. Later on, when the aforesaid writ petition came up for hearing, the same was dismissed on 4th of December, 2017, with the following observations: “In view of the above, this writ petition is dismissed as not pressed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authority of the respondent - RRVPNL within a period of two weeks from today with a prayer for altering the plan of laying down 132 KV electricity line and for removal of towers already erected. It is expected that if any such representation is made on behalf of the petitioner within a period of two weeks, while suggesting alternative plan for laying down the said electricity line, the competent authority of the respondent - RRVPNL shall consider the same objectively and decide it expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of submission of the application. Needless to say that if the grievance of the petitioner is not redressed by the respondent-RRVPNL, the petitioner is free to apply before the District Magistrate, Jodhpur as per sub-section (2) of Section 17 of the Act of 1885. Stay petition is also dismissed.” 8. After decision of the writ petition, petitioner-organization submitted a detailed representation before RRVPNL and District Magistrate on 18.12.2017 and 22.12.2017 respectively. During pendency of the representations, JDA issued order dated 9th of February, 2018 modifying the original allotment order made in favour of the petitioner-organization by granting right of way in the mid of the allotted land. The order dated 9th of February, 2018 (Annex. 7) passed by JDA facilitated cancellation of the proposal for alternative land by RRVPNL, as proposed at the time of passing of order dated 14th of February, 2018 pertaining to alternative lines, and consequently RRVPNL started undertaking construction of poles for laying down high tension line on the land allotted to the petitioner-organization. This sort of situation prompted the petitioner-organization to again file writ petition before this Court bearing No. 2655/18. This sort of situation prompted the petitioner-organization to again file writ petition before this Court bearing No. 2655/18. The said writ petition was decided on 24th of May, 2018 with a direction to RRVPNL to adopt the alternative way near the boundary line of the land allotted to the petitioner-organization. 9. Posterior to the decision of writ petition No. 2655/18, petitioner-organization again submitted a detailed representation to RRVPNL with a request to change the path of high tension line. Be that as it may, when writ petition No. 2655/18 was pending, Ministry of Defence, Government of India, released financial sanction for constructing administrative building as well as residential quarters for the petitioner-organization and in adherence thereof the petitioner-organization handed over the task of constructing administrative building and residential quarters to the Military Engineering Services. 10. The whole endeavour of the petitioners is to impress upon the Court that it is making sincere endeavour to promptly complete construction of administrative building and residential quarters on the land allotted to it. Apart from that, the petitioner has also ventilated its grievance against lackadaisical attitude of RRVPNL in not shifting the project of erecting poles for high tension lines. In substance, petitioners have set out a case that due to such unavoidable circumstances the organization could not vacate the buildings and premises on the agreed date, i.e. 15th of March, 2018, in terms of the compromise submitted before the learned Appellate Tribunal. 11. Faced with this situation, on behalf of petitioner-organization, a Misc. Application No. 01/18 was submitted before the learned Appellate Tribunal to extend the deadline from 15th of March, 2018 to 15th of March, 2021. The respondents contested the application and finally the learned Appellate Tribunal vide its order dated 16th of November, 2018 declined prayer of the petitioner-organization. 12. No formal reply to the writ petition is submitted on behalf of the respondents. However, on behalf of petitioner-organization an additional affidavit is submitted on 10th of April, 2019, wherein yet again petitioner-organization narrated sequence of events showing its inability to abide by the order of the learned Appellate Tribunal to vacate the premises in question before 15th of March, 2021. 13. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the materials available on record. 14. 13. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the materials available on record. 14. It is needless to observe here that by the instant writ petition petitioner-organization has made an endeavour to invoke supervisory jurisdiction of this Court enshrined under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to thwart the compromise order passed by Appellate Tribunal, or to dilute the same. It is not in dispute that the learned Appellate Tribunal passed order dated 30th of May, 2015 on the basis of compromise arrived at between rival parties after considering the application submitted by petitioner-organization. Once the petitioner-organization has volunteered to enter into compromise and agreed to vacate the rented premises on or before 15th of March, 2018, in my considered opinion, it does not lie in the mouth of organization to disown its commitment. It is nowhere pleaded in the petition that the agreement of compromise submitted on its behalf was void or voidable under the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Moreover, there is no whisper that compromise decree or order was passed by the Appellate Tribunal on any misrepresentation or fraud played by the respondents/landlord. All the facts and grounds pleaded by the petitioner-organization in the writ petition are simply highlighting administrative or personal difficulties to abide by the order of learned Appellate Tribunal in vacating the rented premises in terms of the agreed deadline. I am at loss to say that such plea cannot be made subject-matter of judicial review in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction, more particularly to upset, or dilute a compromise decree/order. 15. Well, the difficulties faced by the petitioner-organization may be genuine and vital in the backdrop of functions and duties entrusted to it, but then this fact itself cannot furnish a ground for extending deadline for vacating the rented premises dehors the date agreed by it. It is also noteworthy that even after expiry of the deadline given by the Appellate Tribunal, more than a year has already passed, and therefore, in totality, I find no reason to interfere in the matter. 16. Resultantly, the petition fails and same is hereby rejected. 17. The stay petition is also dismissed.