14, Near Button Factory, Subhash Chowk, Sonepat under the Municipal Committee, Sonepat, an A class Municipality hereinafter referred to as the demised land which was given on lease by the Municipal Committee, under Haryana Municipalities Management of Municipal Properties and State Properties Rules, 1976 to one Prem Kumar Sardana.
In regard to the claim of the appellant on November 19, 1992, the wife of the said late Janak Raj Kapoor also made an application to the Administrator, Municipality, Sonepat requesting him to transfer lease in favour of the appellant her son under policy number 8/56/81 2K2 of 16.4.1984.
One such policy was, issued in 1984 hereinafter referred to as the 1984 Policy which was for a limited period and was replaced by the Policy companytained in the letter of the Commissioner Secretary to Government of Haryana, Local Bodies Administration Deptt.
The policy of the Government which was in operation was 1991 policy May 2, 1991 referred to above, therefore, in our view that application should be treated as an application to give effect to the 1991 policy.
The Government of Haryana had taken a policy decision to eliminate the middle man, namely, the lessor of the Municipalities and grant direct leases in favour of the sub lessees.
1997 cancelled the transfer of lease of the demised land in favour of the first respondent under Section 246 of the Haryana Municipal Act.
In 1971, he leased out the ground floor in favour of one Janak Raj Kapoor who started a printing press therein as the sub lessee.
2001 Supp 1 SCR 189 The following Order of the Court was delivered Delay is companydoned.
While so, the Municipal Committee granted lease of the whole land in favour of the respondent number 1 on July 12, 1992.
248/1997 challenging the said order of the Commissioner but the writ petition was dismissed on August 27, l997.
Leave is granted The appellant before us challenges the order passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab Haryana dismissing C.W.P No.
He died on January 20, 1989 leaving behind him a wife and a son, the present appellant who has been running the press therein.
He sought review of the order of the High Court dated August 27.
It is against those two orders that the present appeals have been filed by the appellant, by special leave.
The first respondent applied to the Chief Executive Officer, Municipality, Sonepat for transfer of the plot of land in his favour on September 9, 1991.
It is a companymon ground that as on that date the 1984 policy was number in operation.
dated May 2, 1991 hereinafter referred to as the 1991 Policy .
That order of the Deputy Commissioner was assailed by the first respondent before the Commissioner who by his order dated October 9.
Eventually the appellant field an appeal against the said order before the Deputy Commissioner who by order dated July 4.
14 ground floor and first floor .
359/1997 filed in the said writ petition, on September 7, 1999.
It appears with the permission of the Municipality the said Sardana raised companystruction, Shop No.
The first respondent was inducted into the possession of the first floor as a sub lessee by the said Sardana in 1989.
248/ 1997 on August 27, 1997 and the order dismissing Review Application No.
The subject matter of the dispute is an extent of 36 sq.
359/1997 which was also dismissed on September 7.
The appellant filed Civil Writ Petition No.
1996 set aside the said order of the Deputy Commissioner.
A narration of relevant facts would be necessary to appreciate the companytroversy in these appeals.
1973 and directed that the transfer be effected in favour of the appropriate person.
1997 in Review Application No.
yards of land companyprising Shop No.
Thus both the appellant and the first respondent are sub lessees of the demised land.
