P SHIVAJI Vs. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner impugnes a notification issued by the 1st respondent in exercise of the powers under Section 3 of Andhra Pradesh Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1968 (for brevity, 'the Act') vide G.O.Ms. No.253, Municipal Administration and Urban Development (II) Department, dated 2-6-1999. The notification reads as under:

(2.) The said notification is challenged on the ground that there is no Andhra Pradesh Public (Eviction of Unauthorised) Act, 1978 and, therefore, the notification which is purported to have been issued under Section 3 of the 1978 Act is illegal and cannot survive. Secondly, it is challenged on the ground that there is ambiguity and vagueness in the notification. Before appreciating these submissions, it is necessary to notice the facts in brief.

(3.) The petitioner was inducted as a lessee by Andhra Pradesh Travel and Tourism Development Corporation (Travel Corporation) on 26-9-1988 in respect of a Cafeteria admeasuring 850 Sq. Ft. of built up portion along 1100 Sq. Ft. of vacant land. In due course of time, Hyderabad Urban Development Authority (HUDA) succeeded to the said Cafeteria and open land, which was given on lease to the petitioner. To cut the long story short, on 26-11-1994, HUDA issued eviction notice to the petitioner requesting to vacate the land. As the petitioner did not vacate the land, it appears and it is alleged that the HUDA tried to prevent the petitioner from running the business in the Cafeteria. Then he approached the Civil Court in O.S. No.4985 of 1991 on the file of the Court of the X Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The suit was dismissed on 16-8-1995 as HUDA, the defendant in the suit, appears to have stated before the Court that any action for eviction of the petitioner would be taken in accordance with law. While the suit is pending, the petitioner was proceeded with action under the Act. The petitioner, it is alleged, also filed a writ petition being Writ Petition No.22852 of 1994 before this Court which was also dismissed. There was a C.M.A. No.33 of 1995 by the petitioner against the HUDA and another C.M.A. No.35 of 1995 was filed by HUDA against the petitioner besides a suit by the petitioner, being O.S. No.5125 of 1994 on the file of the X Junior Civil Judge, which was also dismissed on 8-11-1999. For the purpose of this Writ Petition, it may not be necessary to consider the effect of various Court orders on the issue in this case.