RAM CHARAN PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by petitioner Ram Charan Prasad is directed against an order dated the 25th January, 1972 (Annexure 6) passed by the District Magistrate (Respondent No. 2) under Section 11 (2) (a) of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter to be referred to as the 'Act'). The relevant portion of the said order reads thus:

(2.) In order to appreciate the point involved in this application, it will be necessary to state briefly the facts. As stated by the petitioner in his application, the petitioner owns and possesses a residential house standing over plot No. 118, khata No. 115, bearing holding No. 486 in Ward No. 9 of the Notified Area Committee, Gopalganj, district Saran (now Gopalganj). The said house was under the occupation of Sri Indrajit Mishra, Munsif Magistrate, First Class. Gopalganj, till the 30th June. 1971. Mr. Mishra vacated the house under intimation to the District Magistrate of Saran (Respondent No. 2), through the District Judge of Saran, Chapra, with a copy to the petitioner. A true copy of the letter dated the 30th June, 1971, has been marked Annexure 1 to this application. On the 12th July, 1971, the petitioner occupied the said premises. On the 15th July, 1971, the petitioner filed a petition before the Respondent No. 2 for the release of the premises on the ground that the petitioner himself required the same for his own use and also for reconstructing the same into a pucca house as the old premises had become unfit for human habitation. A copy of the said petition has been marked as Annexure 2. On the said petition, Respondent No. 2 called for a report along with the relevant papers from the Sub-Divisional Officer. Gopalpur. A copy of the order of respondent No. 2 is Annexure 3. The Sub-Divisional Officer entrusted the enquiry to Sri Ramashish Trivedi, Magistrate. First Class. Gopalganj, who held local inspection of the premises in question on the 5th of August 1971 and submitted Ms report on the 6th August 1971. A true copy of the report is Annexure 4. The Sub-Divisional Officer then submitted his report to the District Magistrate on the 6th of August, 1971. A copy of that report is Annexure 5. Thereafter respondent No. 2 passed the impugned order.

(3.) In this case no counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of Respondents 1 and 2 who are State of Bihar and the District Magistrate respectively. Therefore, the facts alleged by the petitioner in his application remained un-controverted.