THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.20088 of 2009 ORDER: The petitioners constructed shops over the land provided for by the Gram Panchayat in the year 2006 with their own funds. An agreement was entered between the petitioners on the one hand and the Gram Panchayat on the other. It was agreed that the petitioners shall incur expenditure of the building and pay the rent at the rate of Rs.150/- per month with a periodical enhancement. The period of lease was said to be for 15 years. A third party filed O.S.No.10 of 2006 in the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Sultanbad. The petitioners state that the Gram Panchayat refused to receive the rents on the ground that the suit is pending. It is stated that the suit is said to have been dismissed and that the appeal is pending. The respondents issued a notice to the petitioners requiring them to vacate the premises on the ground that they did not pay the rents. The petitioners preferred an appeal before the District Panchayat Officer. He too has taken the same view. Hence, this writ petition. On behalf of the respondents, a counter affidavit is filed. The fact that the petitioners were provided a site for construction of shops is admitted. Further, the only ground, on which the petitioners were sought to be evicted, is stated to be the default committed by them to pay the rent. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj and the learned Standing Counsel for the Gram Panchayat. The respondents did not dispute that the petitioners were permitted to construct shops upon the panchyat land with their own funds. The lease agreement was entered into providing for various conditions. The legality of the document apart, it purports the intention of the parties. While the petitioners assert that the respondents did not receive rent on the ground that a suit is pending, the respondents state that the petitioners committed default. To put an end to this controversy, this Court passed interim order on 28.01.2010 directing that the petitioners shall clear all the arrears. Today, it is reported that the arrears have been paid. Once there exists a lease in favour of the petitioners for a specific period, the respondents cannot evict them, before that. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that the petitioners on the one hand and the respondents on the other shall abide by the agreement that is in force between them. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 15.02.2010 JSU THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition No.20088 of 2009 Date: 15.02.2010 JSU