http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: UNION OF INDIATHROUGH DEPUTY SALT COMMISSIONERBOMBAY

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: SHRI PURANMAL LALCHAND MUNDRAAND ANOTHER

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       02/04/1996

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. PATNAIK, R.C. (J)

CITATION:  1996 SCALE  (3)506

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Leave granted.      We have heard learned counsel on both sides.      The respondents  had applied for renewal of the licence under  the   Salt  Act.  The  appellant  insisted  upon  the respondents for  grant of  renewal of  the licence either to concede to  the title  of the  land of  the Government or to obtain any lease from the owners. Challenging the order, the respondents filed  the writ  petitions in the High Court. In similar cases,  the Division  Bench of the Bombay High Court directed that  the appellant would not insist upon conceding to the  title to the property. But appropriate authority was directed to  dispose of  the  pending  matter  on  title  in appeal. Till  then the direction was issued to grant renewal of the licence subject to the result in the appeal.      When similar  matters have  come up,  this Court in two cases where  the title  of the  licences were  upheld by the primary authority but appeals are pending, had directed that pending disposal  of the  appeals, renewal  of the  licences under Salt Act would be granted subject to the result in the appeals. In other cases, this Court directed the respondents to make  application before  the competent Authority namely, the District  Collector who  was directed  to dispose of the application  whether   the  respondent   has  title  to  the property.     This  Court  also  directed  to  consider  the statutory vesting  of the  salt lands  in the State and also all other  relevant documents  that  may  be  filed  by  the respondents in  the adjudication.  A further  direction  was issued to  the appellant  to file the  objections before the original authority  was directed  to dispose  of the  matter after hearing parties within a period of six months from the date of the receipt of that order      In this  case, the latter situation arises, namely, the respondents  had   not  filed  any  application  before  any authority to  establish their  title. It is settled law that the respondents  must be either the owner or the lessee from

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

the owner to seek renewal of the licence.      In view  of the  fact that  the  title  is  yet  to  be decided, the respondents are directed to make an application before the  District Collector.  The District  Collector  is directed to  enquire whether  the respondents  have title to the property taking into account the statutory vesting under the provisions  of the Act as also any other documents to be produced by  the respondents  or the State Government or the appellant, as  the case may be After hearing the parties and giving opportunity,  the matter will be disposed of within a period of  six months  from the  date of the receipt of this order Until  then, the   appellant  is directed to renew the licence under the Salt Act. It will be subject to the result in those title suits.      The appeal is accordingly disposed of, No costs.