ASHOK MATAI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. S.K. Saksena, learned counsel for the petitioner. In assailment is the vires of Section 2(b)(viii) of the Rajasthan Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1964 (for short, hereafter referred to as 'Act of 1964').

(2.) HAVING regard to the challenge projected in the instant petition and the arguments advanced, it is inessential to dilate on the facts.

(3.) MR . Saksena has emphatically urged that having regard to the definition of 'Wakf' provided in Section 3(r) of the Act of 1995, and in particular, the concept of "Wakf -alal -aulad", the same could not have been drawn within the purview of "public premises" envisaged in Section 2(b)(viii) of the Act of 1964. Section 2(b)(viii) being thus repugnant to Section 3(r) of the Act of 1995, is liable to be declared ultra vires, he urged. The learned counsel, to buttress this plea, placed reliance on the decisions, amongst others, of the Calcutta High Court in Anis Fatma Begum v. Board of Wakf, West. Bengal, : AIR 2004 Calcutta 91.