GAJ RAJ Vs. ESTATE OFFICER DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENTWESTERN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks to quash the order Ex. 2 dated August 10, 1976 of the District Judge, Pali passed under Section 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act (Act No. XL of 1971) (for short 'the Act' herein).

(2.) The petitioner has alleged himself to be the owner in possession of a plot of land measuring 90' x 75' situate at Falna, District Pali. The plot is bounded on all sides and there is a constructed room in it. Non-petitioner No. 1 Divisional Superintendent, Western Railways, Ajmer was appointed as Estate Officer under Section 3 of the Act. The aforesaid plot which will for the sake of brevity hereinafter be referred to as 'the plot in question' was claimed as railway land. A notice under Section 4 (11 of the Act was issued to the petitioner to show cause why an order of eviction be not made in respect of the plot in question, which was public premises. The petitioner filed the reply before the Estate Officer stating that the plot in question was not public premises within Section 2 (e) of the Act. The Estate Officer after considering the reply filed by the petitioner, passed the order Ex. 1 dated April 17, 1974 for eviction. The relevant part of the order reads as under:-- "Now therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred on me under subsection (1) of Section 5 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act. 1971 I hereby order the said Shri Gaj Raj Chhajar-Prop. Rajasthan Match Factory, Falna and all persons who may be in occupation of the said premises or any part thereof to vacate the said premises within forty-five days of the date of publication of this order. In the event of refusal or failure to comply with this order within the period specified above, the said Shri Gaj Rai Chhajar-Prop. Rajasthan Match Factory, Falna and all other persons concerned are liable to be evicted from the said premises, if need be, by the use of such force as may be necessary. SCHEDULE Railway land measuring 6750 sft. or 627.1 sq. metres."

(3.) Aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 9 of the Act. In the appeal, the petitioner impleaded the General Manager, Western Railway, Church Gale, Bombay-1 and the Estate Officer (Divisional Superintendent, Western Railways, Ajmer) as respondents Nos. 1 and 2, who are non- petitioners No. 2 and 1 in this writ petition. On October 5, 1974, a preliminary objection was raised on behalf of non-petitioners Nos. 2 and 1 that the appeal was not maintainable as Union of India, which was a necessary party was not added as respondent in the appeal. For the purpose of meeting the above objection, an application under Order 1. Rule 10 read with Section 151. C.P.C. was moved on December 6, 1974 on behalf of the appellant praying therein that the mis-description in the title in place of General Manager may be ordered to be corrected as Union of India through the General Manager. The learned District Judge held that Union of India was necessary party in the appeal. He did not grant permission to the petitioner to add the Union of India at the belated stage and dismissed the petitioner's application under Order 1. Rule 10 read with Section 151 C.P.C. In view of the aforesaid conclusions the learned District Judge dismissed the appeal without going into its merits on August 10, 1976. The petitioner has filed the writ petition questioning the legality and correctness of the aforesaid order passed under Section 9 of the Act. No reply has been filed on behalf of the non-petitioners contesting the writ petition.