Union of India Vs. Reshma Yadav & Ors  Insc 648 (12 October 2006)
IN CONTEMPT PETITION (c) NO.158/1998 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 585 OF 1994
Petition (C) No.585 of 1994 was disposed of by this Court on 11.10.1996 inter alia
with the following directions:
to take care of this illegality, we have to take two steps. First, cancel the
decide as to who should get the shops/stalls, the Government would first
consider whether its policy of 1994, and categorization made by it need
alteration in any way. While undertaking this work, the Government would first
consider whether its policy of 1994 and categorization made by it need
alteration in any way. While undertaking this work, the Government would make
such provisions in the policy which are just and fair.
the policy has been framed the shops/stalls would be allotted as per the policy
by following a procedure having the sanction of law. In case it would be that
any of the present allottee would not be the person so selected, he/she shall
be asked to vacate the shop/stall by giving three moths time. We should require
the Government to formulate the policy within two months and thereafter to
complete the exercise of allotment within two months. Till then the present allottees
would be allowed to continue.
to the aforesaid direction, the policy was revised by an Order dated 9.12.1996.
The dispute involved is with regard to allotment of shop/stalls in Lodhi Road
Complex I and II, New
Delhi. The tenders
were called. The tenders were opened in the presence of tenderers on 24.2.1997
at 3.00 P.M. As no tenders were received in
respect of 6 shops/stalls in Lodhi Road Complex-II, New Delhi on 24.2.1977. Further tenders were
invited in respect of the said 6 shops/stalls, which were opened in the
presence of tenderers on 26.5.1997.
no tender was received in respect of one shop (shop No.1, Lodhi Road
Complex-II, New Delhi). Therefore, fresh tenders were
invited in respect of shop No.1 but no tender was received. Therefore, again
tender was held on 24.4.1998 in respect of Lodhi Road Complex-II, New Delhi.
in the aforesaid tenders the respondents numbering 31 either did not participate
or find place amongst the persons so selected in tenders opened on 24.2.1997
and 26.5.1997. They were asked to vacate the shops/stalls noted against their
names and hand over the peaceful and vacant possession to the concerned CPWD
within three months from the date of issuance of notice.
failed to comply with the notices, Contempt Petition (C) No.158 of 1998 was
initiated against the respondents. However, the same was dropped by an order
dated 13th December,
2001 since the vacant
possession was already delivered. The order dated 13th December, 2001 was in the following terms:- "Since the
possession has already been delivered, the contempt proceeding is
has been filed by Union of India for direction to the alleged contemnors to pay
damages/compensation for their use and unauthorised occupation of shops/stalls
in their possession, after the orders of this Court. This Court issued notice
to the respondents in I.A.No.54 on 16.9.2002.
14.3.2005 this Court passed the following order:- "The applicant-Union of India is directed to file a chart, within
two weeks, giving the date of vacation of each of the respondents and the
amount due till date of vacation. The chart shall indicate the date of which
respective respondents were required to vacate and also the date of actual
vacation along with the rate at which the arrears have been calculated".
to the aforesaid order, Union of India filed a detailed chart giving the date
of vacation of each of the respondents and amount due till the date of
vacation. The date of which respondents were required to vacate and also the
date of actual vacation along with the rate at which the arrears have been
calculated. The chart detailing the arrears of rent/damages payable by the
contemnors is as follows:- DETAIL OF ARREARS OF DAMAGES PAYABLE BY THE
of Contemnor/ occupant Date on which respond- ents were required to vacate Date
of actual arrears calculated at the vacation.
quoted by highest bidder (Rs.) Amount due till the date of vacation (Rs.) 1
Shop No.6 LRC.1 Smt.Reshma Yadav.
17.7.2001 9410/- 458723/- 2.
No.8 LRC.1 Sh.Sant Lal Yadav 25.6.97 17.7.2001 8000/- 389988/- 3.
No.9 LRC-1 Smt. Tara Chowdhary 25.6.97 8.11.2001 16,550/- 868324/- 4.
No.10 LRC.1 Km.N.Lalitha 25.6.97 23.5.2003 10,893/- 772771/- 5.
No.12 LRC-1 Sh.Deepak Kumar 25.6.97 17.7.2001 12,100/- 589856/- 6.
No.2 LRC-1 Smt. Neena Totalani 25.6.97 17.7.2001 2400/- 116997/- 7.
No.3 LRC-1 Sh.Intezar Ahmed 25.6.97 17.7.2001 3407/- 166087/- 8.
No.4 LRC-1 Mrs.Shahnaz Bano 25.6.97 17.7.2001 3194/- 165927/- 9.
No.5 LRC-1 Sh.Sudhir Tiwari 25.6.97 17.7.2001 3502/- 170718/- 10.
No.6 LRC-1 Smt.Renu Mathur 25.6.97 17.7.2001 4224/- 205914/- 11.
No.8 LRC-1 Smt.Harvin- der Kaur 25.6.97 17.7.2001 4680/- 228143/- 12.
No.10 LRC-1 Sh.Harish 25.6.97 30.7.1999 4503/- 113334/- 13.
No.14 LRC-1 Sh.Ashutosh Bhardwaj 25.6.97 25.8.1999 3501/- 91050/- 14.
No.15 LRC-1 Sh.Banarasi Dass 25.6.97 17.7.2001 2720/- 132596/- 15.
No.16 LRC-1 Sh.Jai Prakash Gupta 25.6.97 25.7.01 3905/- 191371/- 16.
No.17 LRC-1 Sh.Percy Pater James 25.6.97 17.7.2001 3505/- 170864/- 17.
No.18 LRC-1 Sh.Harpreet Singh 25.6.97 17.7.2001 3565/- 173788/- 18.
No.19 LRC-1 Sh.Madan Mohan Sharma 25.6.97 17.7.2001 3705/- 180613/- 19.
No.1 LRC.11 Sh.Karma Doorjee 12.9.97 25.7.2001 12,605/- 585375/- 20.
No.2 LRC.11 Smt.Asha Singh 12.9.97 17.7.2001 6400/- 295564/- 21.
No.3 LRC.11 Sh.Dharma Bahadur 12.9.97 17.4.1998 12033/- 86638/- 22.
No.4 LRC.11 Sh.KP Singh 12.9.97 3.5.2000 9155/- 290490/- 23.
No.1 LRC.11 Sh.SS Sharma 25.6.97 24.7.2001 6100/- 298743/- 24.
No.2 LRC.11 Smt.Madhu 25.6.97 9.6.1998 3600/- 41400/- 25.
No.5 LRC.11 Sh.Gurbax Lal 25.6.97 11.8.1998 2500/- 93887/- 26.
No.6 LRC.11 Sh.Gulshan Dhawan 25.6.97 17.7.2001 6100/- 297366/- 27.
No.3 Hanu- man Road Sh.Ashish Kumar 25.6.97 17.4.1998 11105/- 108459/- 28.
No.5 Hanu- man Road Smt.Pushpa Devi Sing 25.6.97 5.8.1999 4205/- 106645/- 29.
No.8 Hanu- man Road Sh.Sushil Sinha 25.6.97 16.12.1998 3755/- 66525/- 30.
No.12 Hanu- man Road Smt.Kusum Sharma 25.6.97 17.7.2001 5240/- 255442/- 31.
No.2 Hanu- man Road Smt. Tulsi Balodi 25.6.97 16.7.2001 9200/- 448189/- Mr. Ranjeet
Kumar learned amicus curiae appearing for Union of India contended that the
respondents contumaciously flouted the orders passed by this Court by remaining
unauthorized occupants of shops/stalls and they are liable to pay the
damages/arrears for the period they have occupied the shops/stalls unauthorisedly
till the vacant possession was delivered to the applicant.
contra learned counsel appearing for the respondents contended that this Court
is not a proper forum to grant such prayer. According to learned counsel, such
powers can be exercised by the Estate Officer in terms of Section 7 of the
Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (hereinafter the
Act). We are unable to countenance with this contention of the respondents. The
entire cause of action as recited above arose not in a proceeding initiated
under the Act but for willful violation of this Court's Order. The fact
remained that the respondents neither participated in the tender nor their
names were included from amongst the select list and remained unauthorized
occupants depriving the highest bidder to occupy the shop/stall thereby
incurring huge loss to the exchequer by reason of their contemptuous misbehaviour
violating the order of the Highest Court of the land would warrant to pay
rent/damages at the rate quoted by the highest bidder against their
shops/stalls for their unauthorised use and occupation till the date they
delivered vacant possession as per the chart furnished by the learned amicus
result I.A.No.54 is allowed. The respondents are directed to pay the arrears of
rent/damages as per the chart within a period of two months from today. If the
amounts are not paid within the stipulated time, the petitioner would be
entitled to recover the respective amounts from the respective respondents by
all available coercive procedures. In that event, the respondents would be
liable to pay interest at 6% per annum on the amounts payable from the date of
this order till its recovery. I.A.No.54 is allowed and disposed of accordingly.