C.W.P.No.1103 of 2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.1103 of 2007 Date of decision: 20.10.2008 Tejinder Singh ......Petitioner(s) Versus Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh and others ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Gopal Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sanjiv Ghai, Advocate for contesting respondent No.1. JASWANT SINGH,J By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing order dated 5/21-07-2004 (Annexure P.4) passed by the Additional Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh cancelling the tenancy of the petitioner qua Shop No.13, Village Badheri, UT Chandigarh (For short “the Village”) and ordering the forfeiture of the security amount; with a further prayer for quashing order dated 20.09.2004 (Annexure P.9) passed by the Estate Officer- respondent No.2 under the Public Premises (Eviction of unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 evicting the petitioner from the said shop, and the order dated 12.12.2006 (Annexure P.12) passed by respondent No.3- District Judge, Chandigarh vide which the appeal filed by the petitioner against the eviction order dated 20.09.2004 (Annexure P.9) C.W.P.No.1103 of 2007 2 has been dismissed. The facts of the case are that the Gram Panchayat of Village Badheri, UT, Chandigarh (For short “the Gram Panchayat”) had constructed eight shops bearing 9 to 16 in the Village in the year 1992- 93. A resolution was passed on 5.11.1993 by the Gram Panchayat for renting out the said newly constructed shops by way of auction. The petitioner was the highest bidder for Shop No.13, Village Badheri, UT, Chandigarh and accordingly the said shop was rented out to him at the monthly rate of Rs.4550/- for a period of three years commencing from 1.12.1993 to 30.11.1996 with an increase in the monthly rent at the rate of 5% after expiry of every year during the tenancy period. Petitioner- tenant deposited the security amount equal to three months' rent with the Gram Panchayat. A lease agreement was executed between the petitioner and the Gram Panchayat vide agreement dated 1.12.1993, copy of which is annexed as Annexure P.1. Thereafter, the area of Village Badheri along with areas of Villages Burail, Buterala and Attawa was merged in the area of Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh (For short “Municipal Corporation”) vide Notification dated 27.7.1994 and all the assets and liabilities of these villages were transferred to the Municipal Corporation. Resultantly, the shops rented out by the Gram Panchayat were also transferred to the Municipal Corporation with successor ownership rights. Since the tenants of the rented shops now vesting with the C.W.P.No.1103 of 2007 3 Municipal Corporation including the petitioner-tenant were not paying rent at all since the execution of the lease agreement despite notice from 1998 to 2003,it appears that the matter was placed before the General House of the Municipal Corporation in its 69th meeting held on 28.11.2003. In the said meeting, vide agenda No.5, it was decided to extend the lease period on revised rent to be fixed by the Finance and Contract Committee of all the shops vested in the Municipal Corporation in Villages Badheri, Burail, Buterala and Attawa of the existing tenants, who are/were paying monthly rent on regular basis and to get all the shops vacated from the defaulters, who have not paid rent and do not deposit the arrears of rent within three months from the date of issue of fresh notices. Accordingly, fresh notice dated 1.1.2004 (Annexure P/2) was issued to the petitioner calling upon him to pay the outstanding rent amounting to Rs.6,79,034/- for the period from 1.12.1993 to 31.12.2003. He was also called for personal hearing but despite this, he failed to pay the outstanding amount which came to Rs.7,71,425/- upto 30.6.2004. Thereupon, the Additional Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh after providing an opportunity to the petitioner to make payment of outstanding rent, cancelled the tenancy of shop no.13 on the ground of non-payment of rent vide order dated 5.7.2004 (Annexure P/4). Against the said order the petitioner filed an appeal and revision which were also dismissed. Before the appellate as well as revisional authority the petitioner did not avail the offer of C.W.P.No.1103 of 2007 4 making the payment of the outstanding rent. After cancellation of the tenancy, the respondent Corporation filed an application against the petitioner for his eviction under the provisions of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (for short the 1971 Act) being an unauthorised occupant. The Estate Officer, Chandigarh- respondent no.2 after providing opportunity to the petitioner passed the impugned order of eviction against the petitioner on 20.9.2004 (Annexure P/9). Against the said order the petitioner filed an appeal before the District Judge, Chandigarh -respondent no.3 which has been dismissed vide impugned order dated 12.12.2006 (Annexure P/12). Hence the present writ petition. Respondent no.1-Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh upon notice has filed a reply. It has been stated that the order dated 5.7.2004 (Annexure P/4) was passed as the petitioner did not pay the fixed monthly rent @ Rs.4500/- (with 5% increase per year) as per lease agreement since the inception of his tenancy w.e.f. 1.12.1993 despite many notices issued in this regard and, thus violating condition no.6 rendering himself liable to be evicted as per condition no.15 of the terms and conditions of the lease agreement dated 1.12.1993 (Annexure P/1). It has been denied that the petitioner ever submitted representation to the Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh for reduction of rent or showed his willingness to deposit the arrears at the rate of Rs.1500/- per month and attached a bank draft amounting to C.W.P.No.1103 of 2007 5 Rs.1,80,000/- in that regard and the same was not accepted by the Municipal Corporation. It has been submitted that it is a matter of record that rent of shop nos. 9.11.15 and 16 was Rs.1400, Rs.1500/-, Rs.1500/- and Rs.1575/- respectively but the same had been fixed by the erstwhile Gram Panchayat and not by the Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had requested the Gram Panchayat for accepting reduced rate of monthly rent i.e. Rs.1500/- per month as had been accepted for some of the adjoining shops in Village Badheri, but the rent was not reduced and for that reason the monthly rent as per lease agreement was not paid. Learned counsel further submitted that initially the proceedings regarding cancellation of tenancy were started against the various defaulting tenants but against some of the tenants the proceedings were dropped and their tenancy was regularised pursuant to a policy decision taken by the respondent no.1-Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh vide resolution dated 28.11.2003, as is clear from the appellate orders dated 2.12.2004 (Annexure P/5) and dated 3.12.2004 (Annexure P/6), therefore, the respondent Corporation has acted in a discriminate manner while canceling the tenancy of the petitioner and getting him evicted under the provisions of the 1971 Act. On the other hand learned counsel for the respondent no.1- Municipal Corporation has submitted that the petitioner for the first time paid an amount of Rs.1,80,000/- in the shape of a bank draft, as C.W.P.No.1103 of 2007 6 arrears of rent, on 8.4.2005 before the learned District Judge, Chandigarh at the time of hearing of the statutory appeal under Section 9 of the 1971 Act against the eviction order dated 20.9.2004 and the same was accepted without prejudice to the rights of the Municipal Corporation. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner has deposited another sum of Rs.1,05,000/- in compliance of the interim order dated 23.1.2007 passed by this Court in the present writ petition while issuing notice of motion and granting status quo regarding possession subject to the petitioner's depositing the said amount. It was then submitted that after adjusting the aforesaid two amounts a sum of Rs.6,06,236/- (without interest) as on 30.9.2008 is due as outstanding rent and if the aforesaid outstanding amount is paid then they have no objection in treating the petitioner in the same manner as the other defaulting tenants, who had cleared their outstanding arrears of rent, were treated. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the impugned orders, we do not find any merit in this petition. Undisputedly, the petitioner has not paid any rent from the day of taking over the shop in question by him in December 1993 till the deposit of aforesaid two amounts of Rs.1,80,000/- and Rs.1,05,000/- before the Courts. Further, at the time of hearing of this case today as well as on previous occasions, this Court had provided opportunity to the petitioner to clear the outstanding rent and seek parity of treatment with other defaulting tenants but the counsel for the petitioner stated C.W.P.No.1103 of 2007 7 that the petitioner is not inclined to clear the outstanding rent. From the perusal of orders dated 2.12.2004 (Annexure P/5) and 3.12.2004 (Annexure P/6), it is evident that the other defaulting tenants including the petitioner were afforded opportunity to clear the outstanding dues and get their lease agreements extended by the Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh on the revised terms and conditions in terms of resolution dated 28.11.2003 passed by the Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh but the petitioner did not avail that opportunity. Therefore, it cannot be said that the approach of the respondent Municipal Corporation is discriminatory. No other point has been urged before us. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned orders. Consequently, the writ petition lacks merit and is hereby dismissed. ( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE October 20, 2008 ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) manoj/joshi JUDGE