GOKUL Vs. RAJASTHAN MUSLIM WAKF BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved against the order dated 29-4-1985 (Annexure-8) passed by the Estate Officer, while exercising powers under the Rajasthan Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1964 (hereinafter called as the Act) and District Judge (Annexure-9) passed in appeal against Annexure-8 respectively.

(2.) It is the contention of the petitioner that the premises where he was residing in Teela Basti near Sikar House outside Chandpole Gate, Jaipur City is in his possession for last more than 50 years. He had constructed his house at the place where it was sandy mounds initially but with hard labour he made pucca construction of the house many decades ago. It is the case of the petitioner that the Improvement Trust Jaipur claiming to be the owner of the property started realising rent from the father of the petitioner. One of the rent receipt issued by the UIT in the year 1969-70 is attached as Annexure-1. It is stated that a survey was conducted by the department to regularise the Basti. He has got electric and water connection in the house which was constructed by him. Vide Annexure-6, the interference by the Municipal Committee was also opposed. It is stated that it was initially agricultural land as entered in the record, but application for conversion to residence was also under consideration as per Annexure-7.

(3.) He received the order dated 29-4-1985 passed by the Estate Officer declaring him to be trespasser on the Wakf Property and to pay the damages to the Wakf Board at the rate of Rs. 100/- per month for three years amounting to Rs. 3,600/- and further to pay damages at the rate of Rs. 100/- a month. It is stated that as soon as he got the knowledge of the order Annexure-8, he applied for the certified copy and filed an appeal in February, 1987. Appeal was dismissed on 17-2-1987 on the ground of limitation. It is stated that as soon as he got the knowledge of the ex parte order, he had applied for the copy of the order which had taken three days, and 21st July 1985 being Sunday, the appeal was filed within limitation. However, the District Judge dismissed the appeal as per the order Annexure-9 on the ground of limitation as well.