GURJIT SINGH (D) THROUGH LRS versus UNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH & ORS.

Citation: [2023] 6 S.C.R. 1046 · Decided: 03-03-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1046
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 6 S.C.R.
GURJIT SINGH (D) THROUGH LRS
v.
UNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH & ORS.
(Civil Appeal Nos. 4826-4828 of 2022)
MARCH 03, 2023
[M. R. SHAH AND B. V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.]
Licence – A licence holder, if entitled to allotment of the
auction platform adjacent to and/or in front of his shop as a matter
of right – Held: To do business in the shop and to carry on business
on the auction platform, are both different and distinct – Merely
because a person is having a licence and doing business in a
particular shop, he is not entitled to the auction platform as a matter
of right and that too, in front of and/or adjacent to his shop – No
such rule and/or regulation and/or guideline supporting such a
claim was brought by the appellant to the notice of the High Court
or even Supreme Court – In absence of any specific rule in favour
of the appellant, right to claim the allotment just in front of his shop
and/or adjacent to the same when the allotment in favour of
respondent No. 5 was made as per the policy and guidelines, High
Court rightly held against the appellant – Therefore, in the absence
of any specific right in his favour, the appellant could not have
prayed for the allotment of shed/auction platform just adjacent to
and/or in front of his shop – Appeals lacks merit.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 4826-
4828 of 2022.
From the Judgment and Order dated 23.10.2013 in LPA Nos.2130,
2131 of 2011 and dated 17.12.2013 in CM No.5249 of 2013 in LPA No.
2130 of 2011 of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh.
P.S. Patwalia, Sr. Adv., Naresh Bakshi, Ms. Harshika Verma,
Tushar Bakshi, Advs. for the Appellants.
Vatsal Joshi, Sarad Kumar Singhania, Bhuvan Kapoor, Varun
Chugh, G.S. Makker, Chandra Prakash, Ms. Dilmrig Nayani, Abhimanyu
Tewari, Ms. Eliza Bar, Tushar Bathija, Shree Pal Singh, Advs. for the
Respondents.
[2023] 6 S.C.R. 1046
1046
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1047
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
M. R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned
judgment and order dated 23.10.2013 passed by the High Court of
Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Letters Patent Appeal Nos.
2130/2011 and 2131/2011 and the subsequent order dated 17.12.2013
passed in CM No. 5249/2013 in LPA No. 2130/2011, by which, the
Division Bench of the High Court has dismissed the Said Letters
Patent Appeals thereby confirming the judgment and order passed
by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petitions, the original
writ petitioner has preferred the present appeals.
2. The facts leading to the present appeals in a nutshell are as
under: -
2.1 That the appellant became the owner of Shop No. 27
situated in the Agricultural Produce Market, Chandigarh. Respondent
No. 5 herein was the tenant of the said shop. Both the appellant as
well as respondent No. 5 were holding the requisite licences to do
business in the market area. Ejectment proceedings were initiated
by the appellant against respondent No. 5. The order of ejectment
came to be confirmed by the High Court. Therefore, respondent No.
5 shifted as a tenant to Shop No. 12 in the year 2007 and applied for
change of address to the new shop, however, the same was rejected
and respondent No. 5 was asked to surrender his licence and apply
for new one. The appellant applied for licence for selling fruits/
vegetables and State Agricultural Marketing Board issued the same.
Since then, the appellant is running the business from Shop No. 27
owned by him. Respondent No. 5 filed a writ petition before the
High Court challenging the order dated 05.07.2007 by which his
application for change of address to the new Shop No. 12 was
rejected. The order dated 05.07.2007 was stayed. The stay was
continued up to 31.03.2009 i.e., till the validity of licence of respondent
No. 5. That thereafter, the Market Committee, Chandigarh rejected
the application of respondent No. 5 for renewal of licence. The same
was the subject matter of another writ petition before the High Court
being Writ Petition No. 5886/2009. That pursuant to the order passed
by the High Court, respondent No. 5 continued to function as per the
old licence. That the Licence Committee constituted under Licensing
GURJIT SINGH (D) THROUGH LRS v. UNION TERRITORY,
CHANDIGARH & ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1048
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 6 S.C.R.
of Auction Platform Rules, 1981 decided that the site in the platform
would be allotted on the basis of “One Site One Shop” and the na
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.