COL RAGHVEER SINGH CHOUDHARY Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR ALWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner been an ex-armyman filed an application under Section 16 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act), before the District Magistrate, Alwar for eviction of respondent No. 2 from his house. THE application was filed on 24. 8. 2000. After service of notices, an application under Section 16 (6) of the Act was filed by respondent No. 2 seeking leave to defend on 21. 12. 2000. It appears that various documents were filed by both the sides to prove their ownership on the land in dispute before the District Magistrate. It was only on 17. 7. 2004 the District Magistrate, for the purpose of ascertaining the legal value and further explanation as to under what circumstances the documents were issued by the concerning Departments in favour of two persons, made UIT, Alwar; Municipal Council, Alwar and Land & Building Tax Department, Alwar, as party to the application and notices were issued accordingly. THE petitioner has challenged the order dated 17. 7. 2004 in the present petition mainly on the ground that in view of provisions under Section 16 of the Act, the District Magistrate should have decide the application for seeking leave to defend on the basis of material already submitted by both the parties. Since a time limit has also been prescribed under the relevant Section for expeditious disposal of such application, the District Magistrate could not have delayed the matter by converting the application into a regular suit for eviction.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, submitted that it is the subjective discretion of the District Magistrate to ascertain the correctness of the documents so filed by both the parties before deciding the application seeking leave to defend, as filed by respondent No. 2, moreso, when the tenancy itself has been denied by respondent No. 2.

(3.) THOUGH the affidavit seeking leave to defend was filed way back on 21. 12. 2000, however, for one reason or the other, the matter has been kept pending for the last more than four years and even orders on leave to defend application have not been passed so far. A bare reading of the impugned order dated 17. 7. 2004 shows as if the District Magistrate is making an inquiry into the working of the Departments concerned. It is not for the District Magistrate to decide the correctness of the orders passed by the concerned Departments. The main purpose of the Section is to provide speedy remedy of eviction to certain category of persons on limited grounds. If the facts are disputed which require detailed inquiry, the same can be decided only by a competent court in a regular suit.