JAGDISH R GUPTA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India impugning the notice which is filed as Annexure- K to the writ petition and may be reproduced as below :- No. ES-11-4(4)/70 Government of India Ministry of Works and Housing Court of the Estate Officer Land and Development Officer 6th Floor, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi. To ShriJagdish Patel, 55, Hanuman Road (1st floor) New Delhi. Union of India Vs. Sh. Jagdish Patel. Subject :- Proceedings under Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 for Eviction. Please take notice that the above matter will now come up for your evidence on 16.7.1974 at 10 A.M. In case of default in your/representative appearance, the proceedings will be taken exparte without entertaining any objection from you thereafter. Given under my signature and seal of the Court this 26th day of June, 1974. sd/- C.P. Khanna Estate Officer Land & Development Office. New Delhi."

(2.) The petitioner has contended that he is a lawful tenant on the first floor of House No. 55, Hanuman Road, New Delhi under Haji Sheikh Nathoo and after his death his legal heirs'. Photocopies of the rent bills dated 17th May, 1951 and 18th May, 1951 are filed as Annexures-A and B to the writ petition. The petitioner has also stated that after the partition of the country the said property was declared an evacuee property and the petitioner became the tenant under the Custodian of Evacuee Property and started paying rent to the Custodian. The rent receipt dated 12th July, 1951 is also filed as Annexure-C to the writ petition. The petitioner subsequently received a notice dated 6th January 1970 under Section 4 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') wherein he was stated to be an unauthorised occupant of the premises and told to show cause why the petitioner be not evicted. Reply to the said notice was sent by the petitioner. The petitioner received a further notice on 25th May, 1972 and 26th June, 1974 and replies to these notices were also sent. The main grievance of the petitioner is that no proceedings in the facts and circumstances of the case could be initiated under the Act for eviction as he had never been in an unauthorised occupation of the premises. Affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents by Shri U.N. Bhyan, Deputy Land and Development Officer wherein it is stated that the property as having been reentered on 19th April, 1969 the same now vestes in the President of India and the petitioner has no locus standi to file the present petition though this fact is disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner who contends that the petitioner is in possession of the property.

(3.) There is no appearrance on behalf of the respondents though the counsel appearing for them was directed to ascertain as to the stage of proceedings before the Estate Officer by Order dated September 2, 1999.