BHUR SINGH Vs. G C JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether the tenant is disentitled by virtue of his past conduct to the relief of quashing of the order of the Competent Authority granting permission to the landlord to institute eviction proceedings, which is otherwise patently bad and liable to be quashed, is the only question that this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution raises.

(2.) Landlord sought leave of the Competent Authority to institute proceedings to evict the tenant. Eviction was sought on the ground of bona fide personal need of the landlord and default in pa.yment of rent. Leave was sought to be justified on the ground that the requirements of Section 19 of the Slum (Improvement & Clearance) Act, 1956 were satisfied. Application was resisted by the tenant on the ground that, having regard to his financial status and the extent of the family, he would not be able to make alternative accommodation. The Competent Authority granted leave to file appropriate proceedings without devoting attention to any of the requirements of Section 19 of the Act, on the ground that by virtue of being in default in the payment of rent, the tenant was disentitled to the protection of the aforesaid provisions.

(3.) At the hearing of the petition, it was not disputed that the impugned order suffered from a fatal infirmity and could not possibly be saved on any reckoning. A plea was, however, made, based on the decision of a Full Bench of this Court, (1) that even so the conduct of the tenant disentitled him to discretionary relief under Article 226 of the Constitution.