Smt. Ratan Kaur vs Union Of India & Ors
- SCC(1997) 10 SCC 61
- Neutral1997 INSC 470
- AIRAIR 1997 SC 2723
- SCR[1997] Supp (1) SCR 48
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
An assignee of land granted by the Government for a fixed term with a covenant permitting only one renewal has no right to a second renewal after the expiry of the initial term and first renewal period, and rejection of an application for such second renewal is intra vires the Government's authority. Where an assignee of Government land has been denied renewal of a grant in accordance with the terms of the assignment and lacks alternative accommodation, the court may, as an equitable measure, direct the Government to consider granting suitable alternative land for construction of a house, notwithstanding the legal correctness of the rejection of the renewal application.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Hon'ble Mr. Justice K. Ramaswamy Hon'ble Mr. Justice d.P. Wadhwa Om Prakash Dubey, R.D. Upadhyay and Subrata Das, Advs. for the appellant M.S. Usgaocar,additional Solicitor General, Dhruv Mehta, D.S. Mehra, Advs. with him for the Respondents The following order of thecourt was delivered:
O R D E R Delay condoned.
Leave granted.
Originallythe land of an extentof 68 acres, 7 Kanal and 11marlas situated in Andaman & NicobarIslands was assigned on May1, 1922to Khansahib Naban Ali for 30 years. After his demise in 1947, his widow Smt. Noorjahan Begum had transferred the land in the name of father-in-law of the appellant in the year1949-50. Mutation was effected by an officerin thename of appellant after the demise of her father-in-law. She filed an applicationfor assignment.That was rejected. On a writ petition filed in the High Court, the learned single Judge directed grant of assignment. IN writ Appeal No. 2490/93, by judgmentand order datedJuly 25,1995, the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court allowedthe writ appeal and held thatshe hadno right for second renewal after the expiryof 30 years. Since under the covenant, the predecessor-in-interest was entitled toonly one renewal, after the first renewal, she had no right. Rejection of her application for assignment isquite legal. The view takenby theHigh Court iscorrect. The lands absolutely belonged to the Government and they were assigned to Khansahib Naban Ali. The assigneehas a right only for one renewal, Admittedly, the lease was made in May 1922. After the expiry of 30 yearsin 1952, further renewal for another30 years having been rejected,she hadno right for assignment. The rejection of the application for renewal of grant is clearly intra vires.
Itis stated that the appellant does not have any house to accommodatelarge family. In thatview, we direct the respondents to consider grant ofsuitable land for construction ofthe house.
The appealis accordingly disposedof. No costs.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free