NARANG MOTOR CYCLE Vs. UNION TERRITORY CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has impugned the order of the District Judge, Chandigarh dated December 1, 1992 passed in MCA No. 15 of 3. 1. 1991, affirming on appeal the order of the Chief Administrator, Chandigarh Administration dated October 27, 1992, in this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) S. C. F. No. 15, Sector 21-C, Chandigarh, is owned by Shri Faqir Chand, respondent No. 6, and others. Notice was issued to him to show cause as to why the said site be not resumed under Section 8a of the Capital of Punjab (Development and Regulation) Act, 1952 for making material changes in the building in breach of Rule 5 of the Building Rules as applicable to the Union Territory, Chandigarh. The validity of this notice was challenged by the petitioner claiming to be a tenant on the disputed premises. He also challenged the validity of the notice in appeal. His plea was negatived by the Chief Administrator, Chandigarh Administration and the order of the Chief Administrator was affirmed in appeal by the District Judge, Chandigarh.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the owner of the disputed premises brought to our notice that the petitioner had no locus standi to maintain this writ petition. His eviction was sought under the provisions of the East Punjab Rent Restriction Act, 1949 as applicable to Union Territory, Chandigarh. He was ordered to be evicted by an order passed by this Court in Civil Revision No. 3268 of 1987, dated September 28, 1992. The order passed by this Court in C. R. No. 3268 of 1987 was affirmed by the apex Court vide order dated December 18, 1992 passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 16713 of 1992. The petitioner undertook to vacate the disputed premises on or before June 30, 1993. He failed to vacate the disputed premises and this led to the initiation of proceedings under the contempt of Courts Act. These facts are not disputed by the counsel for the petitioner.