INDRAJ Vs. COLLECTOR DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners, who claim to have been in possession of the land in dispute for over 20 years as tenants under the Delhi Development Authority and its predecessor-in-office, the Delhi Improvement Trust, assail the proceedings taken under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act. 1971, hereinafter referred to as "the Act", against the petitioners as indeed the order made in it by the Estate Officer, directing the eviction of the petitioners and of the Additional District Judge upholding the said order in appeal.

(2.) The proceedings and the impugned orders are assailed on the grounds that the notice issued to the petitioners under Section 4 (I) of the Act of show- cause why the petitioners be not evicted does not conform to the statutory requirements of Section 4 (1) of the Act and the petitioners were denied a reasonable opportunity of being heard in that the Estate Officer declined to make the aid of his process available to the petitioner for the production of Official records and certain public servants to establish the petitioner's contention that they had been in occupation of the land in dispute as tenants under the then Delhi Improvement Trust.

(3.) It appears to me after hearing learned counsel for the parties that while both the grounds on which the proceedings are assailed are well founded, the petitioners are nevertheless not entitled, in the peculiar circumstances of this case, to any relief.