Pardeep Kumar vs Union Of India And Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 1289 j&K

                                            Sr. No. 76
      HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                      AT JAMMU

                                                      WP(C) No. 1081/2020
                                                         CM No. 2964/2020
                                                         CM No. 2965/2020
                                                      In CM No. 1061/2020
                                                       WP(C) No. 594/2021
                                                         CM No. 2742/2021

Pardeep Kumar                                     .... Petitioner/Appellant(s)

                          Through:-   Mr. Sachin Gupta, Advocate.

                 V/s

Union of India and ors.                                   .....Respondent(s)

                          Through:-   Mr. Ankesh Chandel, Advocate vice
                                      Mr. P.S. Chandel, CGSC.

CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE
                                  ORDER

WP(C) No. 1081/2020

01. The petitioner seeks a mandamus for commanding the respondents

not to forcefully evict the petitioner from his shop site in question

with a further direction to execute a fresh agreement in view of the

judgment passed by the Apex Court.

02. The Apex Court vide judgment and order dated 06.12.1993 in

Union of India and anr. Vs. Shanti Swarup and ors. had directed the

petitioner to deposit an enhanced license fee at the rate of Rs. 250/-

per month with effect from 01.10.1981 and the arrears with effect

from 01.10.1981 to 30.09.1993 to be paid in six half yearly

installments, commencing from 01.03.1994. From 01.10.1993

onwards, the petitioner was directed to continue to pay monthly

license fee at the rate of Rs. 750/-. This rate of Rs. 750/- was to be

valid for a period of three years, thereafter, after the expiry of a

period of three years, the fee was to be fixed with mutual consent,

failing which arbitral proceedings were to be conducted, in which

the Arbitrator was to be nominated by the railway authorities.

03. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he is prepared to

deposit the amount in terms of the Apex Court judgment, which

was not being received by the official respondents.

04. Be that as it may, the amount which is sought to be deposited on

account of the arrears cannot be refused by the official respondents.

In case there is any deficiency in calculation, the same will be

worked out. The judgment and order, as pronounced by the Apex

Court shall be followed in its letter and spirit and any action taken

should be in consonance with the same. Due process of law shall be

adopted in initiating any action against the petitioner.

05. With the aforesaid directions, this petition is disposed of along

with connected application(s).

(Sindhu Sharma) Judge JAMMU 12.10.2021 MICHAL