Heard Mr v. Murali Manohar, leamed

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. V. MURALI MANOHAR Counsel for the Respondent: SRI N. BHUJANGA RAO (Sr.SC FOR CENTRAL GOVI RNMENT) Counsel for the Respondents: SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES, SC FOR INDIAN OIL : SRPORATION Counsel for the Respondent No.6:- The Court made the following: ORDER : I I I --7 1 wp,2O918,202s N8K, J THB HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.20918 of 2O25 ORDER: The petitioner claims to be the owner of Premises bearing Door No.l9-5-28/l2l2lA, l9l5-28l11/b' situated at Kishanbagh, Hyderabad, admeasuring I 135 square yards. It is his case that the subject premises was leased out to respondent No.4-Indian Oil Corporation Limited, vide Lease Deed Document No.l691 of 2004, dated 20.02.2004, and under the said l-ease Deed, the respondent No.4 was permitted to sub-lease the premises, thereby the respondent No.4 had let out the premises in favour of respondent No.6 who is a retail dealer running the petrol pump. It is the further case of I the petitioner that the Lease Deed was executed for a period of 20 years (commencing from 10.12.2004 and expiring on 19.12.2024), and the respondent No.4 is bound to vacate the premises unless the lease is extended on mutually agreeable terms. l.l It is the grievance ofthe petitioner that despite the lease period ended on 09.12.2024, and issuing a notice of termination of lease on

24.11.2024, the respondent No.4 has not vacated the premises,, and kept on running the 6th respondent-petroleum outlet, without any lawful extension of lease, and without any lawful possession of the premises. The petitioner therefore prays for a direction to the respondent No.4 to vacate and handover the vacant possession ofthe subject premises to the petitioner.

2. A counter affidavit is filed by respondents No.2 and 3, essentially contending that a complaint was made by the writ petitioner to the 2nd respondent stating that the writ petitioner is the owner of the subject premises and the lease agreement had already expired and despite such expiration of lease agreement, the respondent No.4 is continuing in the 2 premises. Pursuant to the complaint, the 3'd respon I -F-i!6-:q \ \ \ \ \ wp_20918_2025 NBK, ] - :nt-Deputy Chief Controller of Explosives, issued a Show Cause notice da,r d25.06.2025 was given to the respondent No.4, however, no reply was g . en by respondent No.4; and therefore the respondent No.3 passed an Orde' lated 24.07.2025, suspending the license granted in favour of responden Coiporation, under the powers conferred vide Rule No.4-lndian Oil s2(1)(iii) of the Petroleum Rules, 2002. It is further contended that the ' rrit petitioner got issued a notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Pr rperty Act, to the respondent No.5-Divisional Retail Sales Head, Telanga ra and A.P. State Office, and that as disputed questions of facts are involr ed rvith regard to the lease agreement in the present writ petition, the peti i )ner can avail the altemative remedy .by filing a suit for recovery of po: I competent Civil Court. rssion before the

3. Heard Mr. V. Murali Manohar, leamed counsel for he petitioner; and Mr. Dominic Fernandes, learned Standing Counsel fir the respondent- Indian Oil Corporation. Perused the record.

4. At the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court allowed a simi lar m atter in W. P.No.3 I 174 of 2024 latr"d A2.07 .2025, and therefore similar orders may be passed in this writ pe .i ion also. Leamed Standing Counsel does not dispute the submission of petir .oner's counsel.

5. This Court, considering the Common Order passe I by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.P.Nos.25779 and 18 I 3 of 2024, dated 13.11.2024, allowed the W.P.No.3 1174 of 2024, by Ordel Lated02.07.2025, by directing as follows: "8. Recording the above submission made by learneC counsel on either side, and in terms of order passed by th s Court in W.P.Nos.25779 and 18813 of 2024 dated 13.11.2O24, thisr Vrit Petitiop. \ l l l l 3 wp_20918 2025 NBK,I is allowed directing respondent No.2 to vacate the subject premises, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within in period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. lt is made clear that the respondent No.2 shall hand over the possession of the subject premises to the petitioners on or before

05.10.2025." I i i l

6. Accordingly, the present writ petition also stands allowed, directing the respondent No.4-Indian Oil Corporation Limited, to vacate and handover the peaceful possession of the subject premises to the petitioneq within a period of thrce months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No' costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. oT //TRUE COPY// SD/. C. DEEPIKA s TANT REGISTRA ECTION OFFICER New Delhi.

1. The Secretary, Union of lndia, Petroleum and Na Gas, Shastri Bhavan, 2. The Chief Controller of Explosives, petroleum and Explosives Safety I qrganisation, CGO Complex, Kavadiguda, Secunderabad - 5d0 080. 3 The Depuly Clref Controller of Explosives, petroleum and Explosives Safety Organisation (PE_S-Q),-Room No. 602, 6th Floor, C.G.O. Towels, favadiguda, Secunderabad - 500080. 4. The Managing Director, M/s.lndian Oil Corporation Limited, Office at lndian Oil Bhavan, Fateh Bagh, lrrloosapel Kukatpally Industrial Estite, Sanathnagar, Hyderabad - 500 018. 5. The Divisional Retail Sates Head, Telangana and Andhra pradesh State Office, Ir//Slndian Oil_Corporation, lndian Oil Bhavan, Fateh Bagh, lrrloosapet, Kukatpally Industrial Estate, GOVERNTMENT) IOPUCI

6. One CC to SRl. V. IVURAL| MANOHAR, Advocate IOPUC] 7. One CC to SRl. N. BHUJANGA RAO (Sr.SC 'FOR CENTRAL 8. One CC to SRl. DOMINIC FERNANDES, SC FOR tNDtAN OtL 9. Two CD Copies coRPoRATtON [OPUC] (Along with a copy of the order dated 02.07.2025 in W.p. No. 31174 ot 20241 BIV GJP Yr -"----1 \ \ - HIGH COURT DATED:31 11012025 i I i i I i ORDER WP.No.20918 of 2025 '.1 .l ?CI.u ?ffi ,?. I.. '.,..<' ,\ ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WTTIIOUT COSTS \ ^a& @\9,#-:Pt , -7 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.31174 of 2024 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and rearned standing counser appearing for respondent No.1 and sri.Dominic Fernandes, learned staading counsel for IoCL appearing for respondent No.2. with their consent, this writ petition is being taken up for disposal.

2. This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:- "to declare the action of tlte Respondent No 2 in not ztacating the Retail Outlet site ooer the lond admeasuring 1333.33 Sq.yds in Sy No.286/e, situated at Karimnagar reaenue oillage, situated at Ka,man Road, Karirnnagar Town and District as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the Respondent No.2 to ztacate tlrc site and delioer tlrc possession to the petitioner.,,

3. Brief facts stated in this writ petition are that the petitioners claim to be the owners and possessors of property admeasuring 1333.33 Sq.yds, in Sy.No.286/e, situated at Karimnagar Revenue Village, Kaman Road, Karimnagar Town and District. The case of the petitioners is that the respondent No.2, for establishing and running a retail out-let in the name of M/s.Mahendra Filing Statiorl has taken the subject property on lease for a period of 20 years and the same was registered aide lease deed bearing document No.IOOZO of 2004 dated 15.09.2004. Later, respondent No.2 aide letter dated 08.02.2023, requested petitioners to renew the said lease for a further period of 19 years 11 months and the petitioners oide letter dated

28.02.2023, stated that they are not interested in renewing the lease dated

15.09.2004 and requested respondent No.2 to vacate the subject premises. t.; I i l l l I I l 2 Thereafter, respondent No.2 issued letter dated 24.) i.2O23 and again requested the petitioners to renew the lease and in replr the petitioners on

09.09.2023 issued a letter and requested respondent No.2 r vacate the subject premises. Further case of the petitioners when the res p rndcnt No.2 filed O.S.No.722 of 2023 on the file of learned III Additional , rnior Civil Judge, Karimnagr, for specific performance of the renewal clat's : of the ]ease, the petitioners issued legal notice dated 12.07.2024 and in{orme I respondent No.2 that the lease deed dated 15.09.2004 has been terminated by efflux of time and called upon the respondent No.2 to vacate the premises ,,ithin a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of notice. FIo' rever, respondent No.2 alleging it to be statutory tenant refused to vacate th subject premises. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits thir the lease dated 1-5.09.2004, was for a period of 20 years and the sarr ( was expired on

05.08.2023 and in view of the non renewal of the lease, th, respondent No.2 ought to have vacated the subject premises and instead c ' doing the same, respondent No.2 is refusing to vacate the subject premises nd is in unlawful possession of the subject property. It is further submittecl t rat the petitioners are intending to distribute the subject property to their clr dren and are not interested in renewing the iease at any cost

5. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that in sirr lar circumstances this Court in W.P.Nos.25779 and 18813 of 2024 dated 13. t .2024, has passed the following order: 3 "23.W.P.Nos.25779 and 18813 of 2024 are allowed and disposed of by directing the respondents to vqcate the subject premises and hand over possession of the subject premises to the petitioners within 4 weel<s from l8.l 1.2024.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners further prayed this Court to pass similar order as passed in W.P.Nos.25Zl9 and 18813 of 2024 dated 13.77.2024 and pray this Court to direct the respondent No.2 to vacate the subject premises in a time bound period.

7. Learned standing counsel appearing for respondent No.2 pray this Court to pass appropriate order,

8. Recording the above submission made by learned counsel on either side, and in terms of order passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.25779 and 18813 of 2024 dated 13.77.2024, this Writ Petition is allowed directing respondent No.2 to vacate the subject premises, as expeditiously as possible, preferubly, within in period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It is made clear that the respondent No.2 shall hand over the possession of the subject premises to the petitioners on or before 05.10.2025.

9. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. No order as to costs. JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR Date: O2.O7.2o25 Note:- Issue C.C in a week. Blo SU l