NIRMAL KUMAR Vs. COMMISSIONER JAIPUR DIVN JAIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application by Nirmal Kumar minor for a writ of 'certiorari' to send for the requisition file of the house known as Chandan Mahal, and after a perusal thereof, to quash the order of requisition, and to re-deliver the possession of the property known as Chandan Mahal and the shop underneath to the petitioner. In the alternative, the issue of any direction or order as might be deemed fit under the circumstances of the case has been prayed for.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that he owns and possesses the promises on the first floor known as Chandan Mahal and three shops on the ground floor. This property is situated in Chaura Rasta, Jaipur city. THE first floor of the property, that is Chandan Mahal, was in the occupation if Ramlila Committee, who had their effects lying therein. THE respondent No. 2, District Magistrate, Jaipur, requisitioned the first floor and sealed one shop on the ground floor under the orders of the respondent No. 1, Commissioner, Jaipur Division, who passed an order, dated the 9th of December, 1950, during the pendency of the appeal preferred by Shri Chandan Mal, grand-father of the petitioner. THE order of requisition was passed on the 29th of August, 1950, by respondent No. 2, without giving any notice under Section 3 (3) or 3 (4) of the Rajasthan Premises (Requisition and Eviction) Ordinance, 1949, (No. XI of 1949) (hereinafter to be referred to as the Ordinance) to the petitioner or to the occupier of the first floor. One notice dated the 29th of August, 1950, purporting to be in the name of Shri Chandan Mal, under Section 3 (4) of the Ordinance was found affixed on the first floor of the house on the 8th of September, 1950, ordering Shri Chandan Mal to vacate the house known as Chandan Mahal. Shri Chandan Mal preferred certain objections in his own capacity on the 9th of September 1950, but they were rejected by the respondent No. 2, as being time-barred, and thus his objections were not even considered. THE appeal to respondent No. 1 by Chandan Mal was likewise rejected on the 22nd of January, 1951, but during the pendency of the appeal he ordered the respondent No. 2 to seal even the ground floor of the property so that the landlord may not let it out to someone else. This property was thereupon sealed and taken possession of by the respondent No. 2 on the 20th of December 1950. THE petitioner complains that in the first instance he being the owner of the property, any notice under the Ordinance ought to have been given to him and not to Chandan Mal. Without such notice to the petitioner, the respondents acted without jurisdiction in taking possession of the property. In the second instance he complains that even the notice to Chandan Mal did not comply with the provisions of Section 3 (5) of the Ordinance. He, therefore, prays that the order of requisition of the property, Chandan Mahal, and the sealing of the shop, and possession of both the properties was without jurisdiction, and the order of requisition and sealing be, therefore, quashed and possession redelivered to him.