LawforAll

Showing posts with label breach of condition of patta. Show all posts
Showing posts with label breach of condition of patta. Show all posts
Friday, November 9, 2012

Voltas Limited (i) whether the Company breached any of the terms and conditions of the order of allotment; (ii) whether the notice of demand of 50% of unearned income is legal and valid; and (iii) whether the Company was required to be heard before passing of the impugned orders; We, therefore, hold that the State Government allowed the Company to change the use of the land and to develop the surplus land for purposes other than that for which the said land was originally allotted and such permission is in accordance with the terms and conditions as mentioned in the order of allotment dated 20.1.1969. The first question is thus answered in negative, in favour of the company. In the present case, the respondents have failed to show the category to which the Company belongs for determining its liability towards unearned income. 32. Before this Court the respondents have not produced GO dated 21.11.1957; in absence of 1957 policy it is not possible to decide whether the company is liable to pay any amount towards unearned income as per the said policy. The second question is, therefore, not answered and left open for determination. 33. So far as the third question is concerned, admittedly, no hearing was given to the Company before passing the impugned orders. There is nothing on record to suggest the basis on which the respondents determined the unearned income. It is a settled law that no Penal order can be passed without giving any notice and hearing to the affected person. In the present case, admittedly, the impugned orders were passed without giving such notice and hearing to the company; the impugned orders were passed in violation of the Rules of Natural Justice. The third question is thus answered in affirmative in favour of the company. 34. The High Court failed to notice the aforesaid facts and erred in holding that the Company breached terms and conditions of the order of allotment. 35. For the reasons aforesaid, we cannot uphold the impugned orders and the demand notice dated 6.3.2002 issued by the Collector and the order passed by the High Court. All the aforesaid orders are accordingly set aside. The matters are remitted to the Competent Authority to decide whether the Company is liable to pay any amount towards part of the unearned income. Before passing such order, the Competent Authority will issue a fresh show cause notice to the company referring therein the rule/order/guideline, if any, pursuant to which the company is liable to pay part of the unearned income. The company may file an effective show cause reply within four weeks thereof. Thereafter, the Competent Authority after hearing the Company will decide the question and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. The appeals are allowed with the aforesaid observations and directions but there shall be no order as to costs.

                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION                         CI...