P JOSEPH PRABU Vs. ESTATE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the notice dated 5.8.2002 vide Ref. No. EO/N/4/PVM/GC&St388/121&122/7mc issued under Section 5-A(2) of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, (hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), requiring the petitioner to showcause personally on 22.8.2002 at 1130 hours why the unauthorised construction put up by the petitioner in the public premises should not be removed, the petitioner seeks a writ of Certiorari to call for the entire records relating to the notice dated 5.8.2002 and to quash the same.

(2.) According to Mr. Dulip Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the petitioner has not been heard before passing of the notice dated 5.8.2002 under Section 5-A(2) of the Act, proposing to remove alleged unauthorised constitution in the public premises; and when the Act contemplates the issue of notice to show cause against the order of eviction under Section 4 of the Act and to give an opportunity to the petitioner before passing an order under Section 5 of the Act, which is admittedly appealable, the respondents ought not to have hastened to pass the impugned order under Section 5-A(2) of the Act.

(3.) In my considered opinion, the object of the procedure contemplated under Section 4 and 5 of the Act is quite different from the procedure contemplated under Section 5-A, 5-B and 5-C of the Act.