S V KAMALADEVI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner herein is seeking in this writ petition a certiorarified man-damus to quash the order of the first respondent dated 6-4-1979 in G.O.Rt.No. 1386 confirming the order of the. second respondent dated 1-8-1978 and to direct the respondents herein to release the north-east portion of the premises bearing door No.27/1, New Door No.37, Halls Road, Madras-8. THE said premises, in respect of which, relief is sought for by the petitioner, is under Government tenancy on a monthly rental of Rs.40/-. THE petitioner, who is the owner of the said premises, and who is in occupation of the other portion of the same premises measuring about 651 sq.ft. applied for release of the north-east portion, which is under Government tenancy, on the ground that the same is required for her own occupation and that the portion already under her occupation is quite un-sufficient for accommodating herself and her family members. THE request of the petitioner was rejected by the Accommodation Controller by his order dated 1-8-1978 on the ground that the petitioners request is not either bon. bona fide or reasonable. THE petitioner filed an appeal against the said order before the first respondent and the first respondent by his order dated 6-4-1979 affirmed the order of the Accommodation Controller and rejected the petitioners appeal. Hence the present writ petition.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, the portions of the said premises under Government tenancy was let out long time before when the petitioners children were minors that now after the minor daughters have come of age, the portion of the premises which is under their occupation is found to be quite insufficient for their living and it is out of sheer necessity, they have come forward with a request for the release of another portion of the said premises. The Accommodation Control-ler rejected the request of the petitioner finding "that there are on the whole eight portions in the petition premises, out of which only four portions are under Government tenancy. The landlady is occupying one portion and out-house is used for her guests and relatives. The other two portions are kept vacant. If the landlady, is really in need of additional accommodation, apart from the portion in occupation which itself is quite sufficient to her, she can make necessary arrangements to use the vacant portions. The landladys request is therefore not to be considered either bona fide or reasonable."