Writ interference in contractual allotment disputes is limited where breach of lease conditions is alleged and no statutory violation is shown.

A writ court should not interfere with a notice or resumption action arising from an allotment and lease governed by contractual conditions where the dispute concerns enforcement of private law terms. The text states that the allottee breached stipulated conditions on utilisation and commencement of construction, and that such contractual interpretation and alleged breach do not ordinarily justify Article 226 review unless there is a statutory violation or clear unfairness. Interference was declined, the writ petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was given liberty to submit an explanation within the extended time granted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ court should interfere with a notice/resumption action arising from an allotment and lease governed by contractual conditions.

Analysis: The allotment and lease were treated as a contractual arrangement, and the petitioner was found to have violated the stipulated conditions relating to utilisation and commencement of construction. The dispute turned on enforcement and interpretation of contractual terms, which was held to lie in the realm of private law rather than public law. In such matters, the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not meant to function as an appellate forum to modify contractual terms or resolve alleged breach except where a statutory violation or clear unfairness is shown.

Conclusion: Interference was declined and the writ petition was dismissed, while the petitioner was left free to submit an explanation within the extended time granted.

---