(1.) IN this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has made the following substantive prayers :-
(2.) THE petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order of eviction and the judgment of the appellate authority on the ground that he was not given reasonable opportunity of hearing and the authorities concerned did not apply mind to the record of the case. He has also urged that the extreme step of resuming the site should not have been taken by the Administration simply because he had changed the user of the site. In support of the last mentioned plea, he has relied on the decision of the Full Bench in Ram Puri v. Chief Commissioner, Chandigarh and others, AIR 1982 P&H 301.
(3.) IN the written statement filed on behalf of respondent No. 3, it has been averred that the petitioner had let out the premises to the Bank without disclosing the fact that the site had been sold to him for restaurant purpose.