RAJENDRA PRASAD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the parties. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the office order dated 17.3.2001, passed by the Commandant -cum -Estate Officer, Group Centre, Central Reserve Police Force, Jamshedpur under the provisions of Public Premises (Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, where by he has directed to recover the market rent from the petitioner from his salary,

(2.) THE petitioner is a Head Constable in CRPF. He was transferred in 1999 from Jamshedpur to Tripura. Despite his transfer he retained the quarter at Jamshedpur. Several complaints were made against the petitioner alleging that persons other than the family members of the petitioner have been residing in the said quarter and they are creating nuisance. The matter was inquired into by the respondents and ultimately a notice to show cause was issued under the said Act. Pursuant thereto the petitioner submitted his show cause and the respondents finally passed the impugned order.

(3.) BE that as it may, the very object of allowing a Govt. servant to retain the quarter even after transfer is to facilitate their children to continue their education so that in the midst of the session the family members may not be thrown out from the quarter because of transfer. Admittedly, the children of the petitioner are not school going or college going rather it has come on the record that they have been working in Tisco Factory. The Estate Officer, after considering the show cause, has come to the conclusion that the quarter in question is used by persons other than the family members. The question, therefore, whether the family members of the petitioner or other than the family members have been residing in the quarter creating nuisance can not be adjudicated by this Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction. Moreover, even if there is such Rule of retention of quarter that can not be enforced in a proceeding under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. In my considered opinion, therefore, the petitioner is not entitle to any relief particularly in view of the fact that the children of the petitioner are not school going or the wife of the petitioner has not been working in Jamshedpur after 31st March, 2001. 4. For the reason aforesaid, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. This writ application is dismissed. Petition dismissed.