E-Paper
Top court dismisses Chandigarh Estate Office’s plea on courtyard misuse by SCF
In August 2017, the tenants of the rear courtyard of shop-cum-flat (SCF) number 13 in Sector 22 had filed a petition in the high court against the order of the estate officer, dated May 7, 1990, wherein the resumption of the property and the forfeiture of 10% of the price paid were ordered
In a significant decision having wider ramifications for shopkeepers across Chandigarh, the Supreme Court has upheld the order of the Punjab and Haryana high court wherein the resumption order passed by the UT Estate Office over misuse of a shop’s rear courtyard in Sector 22 was set aside.
Dismissing the special leave petition (SLP) filed by the UT Estate Office, the Supreme Court stated, “We see no reason to interfere with the impugned orders passed by the high court of Punjab and Haryana. The special leave petitions are, accordingly, dismissed.”
In August 2017, the tenants of the rear courtyard of shop-cum-flat (SCF) number 13 in Sector 22 had filed a petition in the high court against the order of the estate officer, dated May 7, 1990, wherein the resumption of the property and the forfeiture of 10% of the price paid were ordered.
The petitioners ran a grocery/food-grain business from the said premises, holding licence as a fair price shop under the civil supplies department of the Union territory.
There were disputes between the petitioners and landlords regarding tenancy. The petitioners alleged that the proceedings for resumption were initiated on the insistence of the landlords to evict them on the grounds that they were using the courtyard for commercial activities, although it was to be used only as a courtyard.
Other than the words “Shop-cum-Flat,” there is no indication of the premises being used for residential purposes. The letter of allotment (LOA) repeatedly refers to the premises having been allotted for commercial and trade purposes. The terms and conditions mandate its use only for carrying on trade or commerce.
They merely state that the back courtyard is permitted for storage purposes only, but the store has been divided into two parts.
According to the UT architectural controls, the first and second floors on these premises are to be used for residential purposes. There is also a back courtyard which, unless otherwise specified or permitted, is to be used as a courtyard. The estate officer proceeded on this basis when it was reported to him that the establishments were running a Kiryana shop in the back courtyard.
“The question of resumption, therefore, does not arise. The only question is whether the petitioners should be compelled to discontinue their business. For the reasons already stated, we are of the opinion that there is no misuse,” observed the HC in its judgment passed in August 2017, and quashed the impugned order passed by the estate officer.
Parveen Duggal, president of the Market Association, Sector 22 (Kiran Theatre Block), said, it was a long-drawn battle, but the order had provided relief to several shop owners, who had been issued notices for building violations. The judgment will impact all commercial buildings in the city, he added.
