UPPORA SANJEEVA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS. after his retirement from the Life Insurance corporation of India some time in the year 1983, the petitioner refused to vacate staff quarters allotted to him while in service, proceedings in eviction were nstituted against him under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised occupants) Act. After hearing, opportunity and enquiry, an order of eviction was passed. The petitioner's appeal therefrom was dismissed by the Principal Judge, City Civil Court, Bombay. Hence this petitibn.

(2.) THE main question in this petition is now covered against the petitioner by a ruling of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in union of India and others and M/s Bennett Coleman and Co. Ltd. and another v. Life Insurance Corporation of India and others, decided on 7th August, 1990, wherein it has in no uncertain terms been held by the Supreme Court as follows :

(3.) IT was also contended that even if that be so, the petitioner has been discriminated against, inasmuch as, while other employees have, after retirement, been permitted to retain staff quarters allotted to them while in service, that facility or advantage has not been given to the petitioner. We are unable to agree. Hardly any instance of staff quarters being retained with the former employee of the Corporation even after his retirement has been brought to our notice. On the other hand, Counsel for the Corporation has made a categorical statement before us that there is no instance of any staff quarter being permitted to be retained by an ex-employee of the Corporation after his retirement. There is also the affidavit of the Corporation's Administrative Officer. In paragraph 12 thereof he states -