SAIYADA MOSSARRAT Vs. HINDUSTAN STEEL LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A Seven-Judge Constitution Bench decision in Hari Singhs case (1973) 1 SCR 515 : (AIR 1972 SC 2205) upholding the constitutionality of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 [Act 40 of 1971] (Act) notwithstanding, the petitioner has renewed the challenge by way of this petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India. Of course the epicentre of the present challenge has shifted and is now located in the plea that Parliament does not have the legislative competence to legislate on the subject of the impugned legislation which dimension was not in focus in Hari Singh's case.

(2.) The petitioner was allotted a piece of land on licence by the respondents. The licence was cancelled on the allegation that petitioner had illegally made encroachment on further land and had illegally raised a structure on the land granted on licence. The respondent terminated the licence. Proceedings were initiated against the petitioner under the Act. The competent authority passed an order of eviction against the petitioner. Petitioner's appeal to the appellate authority under the Act was dismissed. The High Court also dismissed the petition preferred by the petitioner. This court refused to grant special leave and dismissed petitioner's Special Leave Petition. Petitioner even so filed a Civil Suit which came to be dismissed for default of appearance. Meanwhile the petitioner had approached this court by way of a Special Leave Petition against an interlocutory order passed by the Civil Court. The said special leave petition also came to be dismissed for default of appearance. And thereafter the present Writ Petition has been instituted under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India. In the petition as originally framed the constitutionality of the Act was not challenged. The said challenge was incorporated by amending the petition. When the matter came up for hearing this Court issued a Rule Nisi limited to the question of constitutionality of the Act as is evident from the relevant part of the order extracted hereiribelow : -

(3.) Thus the only question before the court presently is as regards the constitutional validity of the Act. The scheme of the Act as set out in Hari Singh's case (AIR 1972 SC 2205 at p. 2208) is as under :-