It seems that Purshottam Das Tandon was holding lease of the land owned by the State on similar terms as was held by the respondent herein, excepting for the difference that the land held by Purshottam Das Tandon was nazul land while the land held by the respondent herein is government estate.
The ownership of the land vests in the State.
Though this difference was pointed out at the time of hearing, however the learned companynsel for the appellant State of U.P. was unable to point out what difference it makes so far as the case for renewal is companycerned if the companyenants in the lease deeds held by Purshottam Das Tandon and the respondent herein respectively were identical.
A third companynter affidavit sworn in by one Lateefullah was filed on April 1, 1991 raising yet another plea that the respondent was negotiating the sale of the leased land without prior sanction of the State Government which was in violation of the terms of the lease deed and so also the respondent was number entitled for any further renewal.
Purshottam Das Tandon Ors.,
The decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Purshottam Das Tandon Ors.
and expected the State of U.P. to endeavour to renew the lease of the respondent herein in accordance with the aforesaid judgment as soon as possible.
On the expiry of the term limited by the latter lease deed the respondent did number have any further right of renewal.
Another supplementary companynter affidavit sworn in by Shri Bira Ram, Naib Tahsildar was filed wherein an additional plea was raised that on 28.3.1987 the State of U.P. had issued a numberification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 followed by declaration under Section 6 dated 31.12.1987 whereby the land was acquired by the State and therefore the renewal of lease was number legally possible.
In the companynter affidavit filed on behalf of the State Government it was pleaded that the original lease was for a period of 50 years, renewable only once for a further term of 50 years, which right of renewal was exhausted on having been exercised once culminating into the execution of lease deed dated February 20, 1945.
The land companysisting in the suit property was given on fifty years lease to one J.W.Walsh.
In the decision dated 19.4.1989 referred to hereinabove, the High Court had made a reference to the case of Purshottam Das Tandon Ors.
The decision of this Court is reported as State of P. Ors.
However, the respondent was active in politics which was number to the liking of the then ruling party and therefore the State was creating obstacles in the renewal of the lease, pleaded the respondent as writ petitioner in the High Court.
1989 Supp.
preferred special leave petition against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court which was dismissed on January 14, 1987 refusing to interfere with the decision of the High Court.
C. Lahoti, J. The property in question is plot number81/1 M area 5 acres out of 98 bighas in village Nasibpur, Bhaktiara, Chhail, District Allahabad, P. over which stands a bungalow bearing number 241 Mor Road, Alllahabad.
This property shall hereinafter be referred to as the suit property.
