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

PETITIONER: SUBHASH CHANDRA CHAUDHARI

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: RAM MILAN & ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       31/01/1997

BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, G.T. NANAVATI

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Leave granted.  We have  heard learned  counsel on both sides.      This appeal  by special  leave arises from the judgment dated May  24, 1996 passed by the High Court of Allahabad in W.P. No.8654/95.      The admitted  position is that though lease was granted to the  appellants on  December 5, 1994 for one year and was executed, as  admitted by the respondents, on the said date, it expired  on December  5, 1995.  It is  contended that the lease  granted  to  the  appellants  was  cancelled  by  the Commissioner on February 17, 1995 and on a revision filed by the appellants  to the State Government by order dated March 23, 1995,  the order  of the Commissioner was set aside. But unfortunately the  operation of  the order of the Government was stayed  by the  High Court  on May  21, 1995  and it set aside the  order of the Government by the impugned order. It is not in dispute that pursuant to the direction of the High Court the  auctions were  conducted and  third parties  have been inducted  to work  out the  excavation of the sand; but they are  not before  us. Though  there is some force in the argument of  the learned  counsel for  the  appellants  that since the  working of the period of the lease granted to the appellants was  not allowed  to be fully utilised on account of the  orders passed by the courts or the Commissioner, the time may be extended for the appellants to execute the lease and work  out the  lease for  the residue  period, as stated earlier, since  the third  party rights  have  already  been intervened, in their absence we cannot give the direction as sought for.  Under these  circumstances, it is stated in the affidavit itself that the respondent-Government have offered refund of the amount deposited by the appellants as directed by the  High Court.  The respondents  are directed to refund the amount of Rs. 6,30,000/-.      We are constrained to dismiss the appeal. No costs.