PHIRAY RAM Vs. NATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Mr. S. V. Raju, learned Counsel for the respondents, appears and waives service of rule on behalf of respondents. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.

(2.) This petition is filed against an order passed by the Competent Authority on 24/02/1995, by which the petitioner was ordered to be evicted, holding him to be in unauthorised occupation of the disputed quarter. The said order was confirmed by the lower appellate Court on 12/04/1995.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that he is serving with the National Airport Authority as Fire Operator. He was appointed to the said post in November, 1982 and since then, he is working with the respondents. It is asserted by him that he is entitled to have allotment of quarter Type II. But as quarter Type I was vacant and since the petitioner was in need of quarter, he was allotted Type I quarter on 21/12/1992. The petitioner thereafter was allotted quarter No. B-4 of Type II on 22/02/1995 and possession thereof was also given to him on the next day, i.e., on 23/02/1995. Immediately on the next day, i.e., on 24/02/1995, the said allotment order was cancelled without issuing notice calling for explanation or complying with the principles of natural justice. The petitioner came to know about the said fact. The petitioner, therefore, filed Civil Suit No. 171 of 1995 in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ahmedabad (Rural) which is (1) 1969(3) SCC 415 still pending. It is his case that thereafter, respondent No. 2 issued a notice on 6/03/1995 under Sec. 4 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why he should not be evicted from quarter No. B-4 of Type II. The petitioner submitted his reply on 13/03/1995. On 15th of March, 1995, the impugned order was passed by respondent No. 2-Competent Authority directing the petitioner to vacate the quarter. Against that petitioner approached the District Court, Ahmedabad (Rural) and the learned 3rd Joint District Judge dismissed the appeal. Against that order, the petitioner has approached this Court.