RENU Vs. ESTATE OFFICER PRESIDENT SECTT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALLEGING non-application of mind, discrimination, petitioner's eviction from Stall No. 11 in President's Estate Market, New Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as the 'subject stall') is assailed in this petition.

(2.) STATUTORY Notice under Section 4 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, (Annexure- P-3) was issued to the petitioner on 1st April, 2006 wherein it was stated that the license agreement executed on 3rd March, 1998 came to an end on 31st December, 1998 and thereafter, petitioner's husband had no authority to remain in the public premises in question. Prior thereto, petitioner was informed on 23rd January, 2006 by the second respondent vide Communication (Annexure- P-2) that her request for regularization of the subject stall in her name cannot be acceded to.

(3.) PETITIONER's counsel precise challenge to the impugned eviction of the petitioner from the subject stall is on the ground that the petitioner is not an authorised occupant in the subject stall and there is no reason to evict the petitioner from the subject stall. Thus, it is contended by petitioner' counsel that the Estate Officer has acted arbitrarily in passing the Eviction Order without returning a finding that the subject stall is a public premises and the impugned order also fails to take note of the afore-said defects and so, the impugned order as well as the eviction of the petitioner from the subject stall deserves to be set aside.