D NAGARAJU Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short point for consideration is whether the order passed under Annexure-O purported to be in exercise of the power conferred on the authority under S.6(1) of the Public Premises (Eviction of unauthorised occupants) Act, 1971, is sustainable and whether the respondents have exercised that power in accordance with law.

(2.) A reading of Annexure-O simplifies the question for consideration and decision. What emerges from Annexure-O is that on 12-6-1978 a notice under sub-section (1) of S. 4 of the Act was served on the petitioner and in response to the said notice after the petitioner showed the cause, straightway the Estate Officer proceeded to issue the final order under sub-section (1) of S. 6 of the Act calling upon the petitioner to vacate the building within the time limit specified in the said notice and threatening the consequences thereof in the event of non-compliance with the notice.

(3.) The contention of the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the condition precedent for issue of the final order under S. 6(1) of the Act is the passing of an order of eviction under sub-section (1) of S. 5 of the Act. According to the learned Counsel such an order of eviction was not passed and, therefore, the impugned order under Annexur-O is unsustainable.