K B SINGH Vs. CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions have been filed by the tenants of House No. 10, Sector 15-A Chandigarh for quashing the order passed by the Assistant Estate Officer, exercising the powers of Estate Officer, Union Territory, Chandigarh, for resumption of the house site and forfeiture of 10% of the premium. They have also prayed for quashing the order passed under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').

(2.) There is no dispute between the parties that proceedings for resumption of the house site allotted to Smt. Sita Devi in 1954 were initiated vide show cause notice dated 26.5.1989 on the ground of alleged misuse of the residential premises. After service of notice upon the owner of the house and two of the tenants, namely, Shri Satpal and Shri Pawan Piyush, the Assistant Estate Officer passed the order dated 12.3.1990 for resumption of the site and forfeiture of 10% of the premium. (The date of issue of this order is 23.5.1991). Thereafter, the proceedings were initiated by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Chandigarh, exercising the powers of Estate Officer, under the 1971 Act. He served notices upon the petitioners requiring them to show cause against their proposed ejectment. On 17.1.1991, the concerned Sub Divisional Magistrate ordered the ejectment of petitioners. The appeal filed by them under Section 9 of the 1971 Act were dismissed by the District Judge, Chandigarh.

(3.) One of the grounds on which the petitioners have challenged the legality of the order of resumption, the order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate under the 1971 Act as well as the judgment of the learned District Judge is that the Assistant Estate Officer did not give any notice and opportunity of hearing to them though they were in occupation of the premises.