Darshanam Fashions vs. Government Of Himachal Pradesh & Ors

Held

The Court disposed of the petition with specific directions. The respondents were permitted to issue a tender for the Convention Hall's allotment. However, the petitioner was allowed to retain possession of the Convention Hall until a decision on the tender was finalized. This retention was made conditional upon the petitioner paying the revised daily rent of Rs. 45,000/- plus GST, provided that this revised rent had been approved by the Competent Authority and any applicable rebates for the petitioner were considered. The Court also noted the petitioner's undertaking to hand over possession within one week of receiving notice if they were unsuccessful in the tender process. Furthermore, the respondents were directed to ensure the immediate restoration of the petitioner's electricity connection to the Convention Hall.

Facts

The petitioner, Darshanam Fashions, filed a writ petition challenging a notice dated September 28, 2019, rejecting their request for a lease extension of the Convention Hall at Himachal Bhawan until March 31, 2020. They also challenged a notice dated September 30, 2019, directing them to vacate the premises. The respondents, Government of Himachal Pradesh and others, stated they were issuing a tender for the Convention Hall's allotment and had revised the daily rent to Rs. 45,000/- plus GST via a notice dated October 21, 2019. The petitioner argued that they should be allowed to retain possession until a tender decision is made and that the rent revision notice was not issued by a competent authority.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner should be allowed to retain possession of the Convention Hall while the respondents finalize a tender for its allotment, considering the rejection of their lease extension request and the direction to vacate. Petitioner's argument: The petitioner contended that there was no reason to vacate the Convention Hall in the interim, especially since they would participate in the upcoming tender. They sought to retain possession until a decision on the tender was made. They also questioned the validity of the rent revision notice, asserting it was not issued by the Competent Authority. Revenue/State's argument: The respondents indicated their intention to issue a tender for the allotment of the Convention Hall and informed the court about the revised daily rent of Rs. 45,000/- plus GST.