VIMLA MEHRA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as the Code) arising out of the following facts. The petitioner instituted an application under section 13 of the East Punjab Rent Restriction Act, 1949, against Janta Girls High School, Chheharta, through its President Shri Chaman Lal in the Court of Rent Controller, Amristar, on July 20, 1988. Written statement was rued by the President of the said Society and order of ejectment was passed by the Rent Controller on 1-2-1989. The landlady took out execution of the order of ejectment and obtained possession of the premises through baillif on 28-4-1989. The Society instituted suit through its President and Manager on 9-5-1989 for possession of the building. Along with the suit, an application for temporary injunction was rued. By order dated 12-5-1989, Sub-Judge 1st Class, Amritsar, restrained owner landlords (a) from alienating the suit property, and (b) parting with its possession in favour of any other person till further orders. The petitioner also instituted a suit seeking an injunction restraining the State of Punjab, the District Education Officer and the Headmistress of the Janta Girls High School, Chheharta from recovering from the petitioner the grant-in-aid already advanced to the school as the amount had already been duly disbursed to the members of the staff and the petitioner was not concerned therewith in any manner. It was at this stage that members of the staff of the Janta Girls High School, Chheharta made a complaint to the Executive Magistrate, Amritsar, under Section 145 of the Code whereupon the impugned order Annexure P.1 under Section 145(1) of the Code was passed on 2-6- 1989. On the same day, an order Section 146(1) of the Code was passed by the Executive Magistrate appointing District Education Officer (Secondary), Amritsar, as Receiver with the direction to take over possession of the school building and to run the school until decree or order to the contrary was passed by a competent Court determining the rights of the parties. Through this petition, both these orders under Sections 145 and 146 of the Code are sought to be quashed.

(2.) By order dated June 13, 1989 notice was given to the respondents and operation of the impugned order Annexures P.1 and P.2 was stayed. Respondent No.1 on the one hand and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 on the other hand, have rued their written statements. Respondent No.1 in his affidavit has stated that on receipt of a complaint instituted by seven members of the staff of the school he was satisfied with the averments made therein and initiated proceedings under Section 145(1) of the Code. He also passed order Annexure P.2 and in compliance therewith the Receiver took possession of the premises on 5-6-1989 and started running this school from the same day. It was not brought to his notice that there were ejectment proceedings before the Rent Controller and possession etc. was delivered in execution of the order of the Rent Controller. The petitioner instead of filing a reply and bringing the relevant facts to his notice has rushed to the High Court. He had, however, complied with the order of stay dated June 13, 1989.

(3.) In a detailed reply rued by respondents Nos. 2 and 3, it was stated that the school had been running in the premises for over 30 years. It was constructed on the land belonging to the petitioner who was one of the founder member and Manager of the School. The school was receiving 95% aid from the government on Delhi pattern. The petitioner had embezzled substantial amount of funds received, from the government by way of aid. She was, therefore, made to draw the money along with the District Education Officer. The school was managed by an elected body. Elections took place on 6-12-1987 in which respondent No.2 was elected as President and respondent No.3 as Manager. The list of office bearers of the governing body was sent to the Registrar of Firms and Societies. The petitioner was divested of the powers as Manager by the duly constituted elected body. The eviction proceedings were challenged as totally sham on numerous grounds. Some Chaman Lal had been put as respondent therein. In fact, Chaman Lal s/o Duni Chand has filed an affidavit in the Civil Court stating that he was never President or member of the governing body of the school nor he appeared in the Court of the Rent Controller, Amritsar, in any proceedings filed by the petitioner. The petitioner, it was further pointed out, only owned the land underneath the school and the portion of the building from which ejectment was sought was delineated in red in the plan tiled in the ejectment application. This was only a part of the total building which comprises of 12 rooms and a hall besides open ground. The school had about 300 or 350 students besides a staff and because of the aforesaid action of the part of the petitioner the students were facing undue hardship and their studies were suffering. The above reply was supported by affidavit Shri Jagdish Singh, respondent No.2, who is stated to have been elected as President of the governing body for the current year.