(1.) THE Life Insurance Corporation of India is the petitioner herein. It acquired the assets of the South India Teachers' Union Protection Fund Limited, which included five buildings bearing Door Nos. 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 in S.I.T.U. Colony, Raja Annamalaipuram four of which are residential buildings. At the time of acquisition respondents 2 to 6 who were not the employees of the Corporation, were occupying separate portions of the said residential buildings. Since the Corporation felt considerable need for providing residential houses for the occupation of its staff, it has been persuading respondents 2 to 6 to give vacant possession of the portions of the premises in their occupation. When it could not get possession of the portions from them, it applied to the first respondent to exempt the premises Nos. 3, 4, 6 and 7 under Section 29 of the Tamil Nadu Act XVIII of 1960 from the provisions of Section 10(3) of the said Act.
(2.) THE two grounds that were urged in support of the application for exemption are : (1) that it is not possible for the Corporation to file an application for eviction under Section 10(3) before the Rent Controller on the ground that the premises are required for housing its staff and (2) that the staff of the Corporation who had to be provided with houses are pressing for providing residential accommodation. The said application for exemption filed before the first respondent seems to have been, sent to the Accommodation Controller for remarks. The Accommodation Controller had reported that the Corporation can file an application for eviction before the Rent Controller under Section 10(3) of the Act and that the hardship that will be caused to the tenants will outweigh the benefits which will accrue to the Corporation by exemption of the buildings. Taking note of this report from the Accommodation Controller, the Government passed an order in. G.O. Rt. No. 4319, Home, dated 13th October, 1972 rejecting the petitioner's application for exemption on the ground that the Corporation has got a remedy to evict the tenants under the Act and that therefore there is no justification for granting exemption under Section 29 of the Act. The said order of the Government, dated 13th October, 1972 has been challenged in this writ petition.
(3.) IN this case, as already stated, the Life Insurance Corporation is not requiring the building for its own use or for its own purposes, i.e., for carrying on the life insurance business. The building is required by the Corporation to provide housing accommodation for its own employees. Provision of housing accommodation for its employees has nothing to do with its business or the purposes for which the Corporation has been established. Though the Corporation may be morally obliged to provide its staff housing accommodation it cannot be taken to be the purpose of the Corporation. In these circumstances, therefore, the Corporation cannot file an application under Section 10(3) for eviction, of the tenants for the purpose of providing, house accommodation to its staff.