LAL CHAND Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE, HARIDWAR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Under U.P. Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1972, (hereinafter to be called as "Act"), it contemplates drawing of the proceedings against a class of occupants who are said to be unauthorized occupants as defined under the Act in relation to a public premises.

(2.) In the case, at hand, admittedly, the respondent No. 3, has given a piece of land to the petitioner for 30 years' lease by Nagar Palika in the year 1966. The said lease was to expire in the year 1996. According to the Nagar Palika, despite of expiry of the period, when the premises was not vacated, Nagar Palika had issued various notices to the petitioner, i.e. on 21st August, 1996, 9th August, 1996 and 7th March, 2001, asking the petitioner to vacate the premises, this not be a notice under Public Premises Act. When despite of the said notice, the petitioner has not vacated the premises, then, they initiated the proceedings by making reference to the Prescribed Authority for initiating the proceedings under the Act. As per the records available, the notice, annexure No.3 to the writ petition, reflects to be a notice under Section 5 (1) of the Act. Consequently, the said notice was replied by the petitioner and, thereafter, the Prescribed Authority passed the order impugned directing the petitioner to vacate the premises. On an appeal, preferred by the petitioner under Section 9 of the Act, the direction as issued for vacating the premises by 26th March, 2007, was affirmed by the Appellate Court, by its judgment dated 31.05.2007.

(3.) It is these two judgments dated 26th March, 2007, passed by the Prescribed Authority and that of 31st May, 2007, passed by the Appellate Authority, which is subject matter of consideration before this Court.