Issue: Whether the High Court was correct in restoring a resumed plot despite the default of the original allottees and the proxy litigation by a purported tenant.

Held: Supreme Court upheld the statutory authorities' cancellation orders, finding the High Court’s decision legally and factually unsustainable.

1. Introduction and Context

• Para 1-3:
  The appeals stem from the impugned order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court allowing writ petitions and restoring a resumed plot to the original allottees despite their default in payments.

2. Factual Background

• Para 4:
  • Plot auctioned to respondents (allottees) on a 99-year lease in 1989.
  • Allottees failed to pay 75% of the premium, resulting in lease cancellation by Assistant Estate Office in 1991.
  • Appeal by allottees dismissed by Chief Administrator in 1992.
  • Subsequent revision petition (filed after five years) dismissed by Advisor in 1999.

3. Tenant's Role in Litigation

• Para 4(iv-v):
  • Alleged tenant, M/s. Mohit Medicos, also challenged the cancellation order but provided no proof of tenancy.
  • Both allottees and alleged tenant filed separate writ petitions, which were allowed by the High Court in 2015.

4. High Court Order

• Para 2:
  High Court quashed all orders of cancellation and directed restoration of the plot, subject to payment of outstanding dues and formalities.

5. Supreme Court Observations

• Para 7-11:
  • Allottees failed to clear dues despite multiple opportunities.
  • Alleged tenant had no locus standi due to lack of evidence proving tenancy.
  • High Court erred in treating the tenant as a stakeholder and overlooked procedural compliance by statutory authorities.
  • Proxy litigation by M/s. Mohit Medicos was deemed an abuse of process.

6. Ratio Decidendi

• Para 11-12:
  • The High Court misapplied legal principles by entertaining claims of a party with no legal standing.
  • Legal adherence to auction terms and statutory procedures justifies lease cancellation.

7. Decision

• Para 12:
  The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, setting aside the High Court's order, restoring the cancellation of the plot.

Acts and Sections Discussed:

1. Chandigarh Lease Hold of Sites and Building Rules, 1973
   • Rule 12(3): Procedure for lease cancellation.
2. Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971
   • Discussed in tenant’s claim.
3. Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952
   • Definition of "transferee" under Section 2(k).

Subjects:

#LeaseCancellation #ProxyLitigation #HighCourtError #TenantLocusStandi #PublicPremisesAct