OWP/792/2006 of JANTA DAL UNITED Vs STATE TH. EVACUEES'S PROPERTY AND ORS. on 25 November 2011

Conclusion

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU

OWP No. 792/2006|CMP No. 1048/2006

Date of decision:25.11.2011.

Janta Dal (United)Vv.State and ors.

//////////////////////////////////////////////////

The petitioner-Janta Dal (United), Sharad Yadav Group, has approached this Court seeking quashing of Jammu andKashmir Special Tribunal, Jammus Order dated October 31,2006, dismissing Its Revision preferred against Order dated13.08.2005 of Custodian, Evacuee Property, Jammu, wherebyits allotment of EP House No. 239 situated at PanjbakhtarRoad, Jammu was cancelled.

All that is pleaded in the Writ Petition to seek setting aside of the questioned Orders Is that the petitioner was running its”Office in the premises in question for the last more than two.decades and having first right to allotment/renewal of Lease,the Authorities under the Jammu and Kashmir Evacuees|Administration of Property Act cannot evict it.forcibly withoutadopting due course of law It is Indicated in the Petition that former President of the|otate Wing of Janta Dal had filed Civil Suit seeking PermanentProhibitoryInjunctionrestraining|the|EvacueeProperty|Department from evicting the petitioner from the premises inquestion, and after his death, petitioner had questionedCustodians Order before the Jammu and Kashmir Special Triounal; but without SUCCESS.

The Custodian Evacuee Property, Jammu contests the.petitioners Claim urging that having been found to have.misused the premises letting it to others, thereby violating theprovisions of Rule 14 of the Evacuee Property Rules, theallotment made in favour of Sanjay Gupta, deceased Presidentof the State Unit of Janta Dal was cancelled when despiteNotice issued to him in this behalf, he opted not to contest Itand the petitioner had, therefore, no right to invoke the Extra.Ordinary Jurisdiction of the Court.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Perusal of the records reveals that the Custodian|Evacuee Property issued Notice to the former President of thepetitioner calling upon him to Show Cause as to why theallotment be not cancelled for violation of the provisions of Rule14 of the Evacuee Property Rules and a copy thereof was_

served on the former President by pasting it on the premises inquestion, |.e., following one of the modes of service asprescribed in Evacuee Property Rules.

Ex-President did not respond to the Notice andaccordingly eviction order was Issued against him, wnicn ne did.not question before the Authorities prescribed under the Jammu.and Kashmir Evacuee Administration of Property Act. Ratherthan questioning the Custodians order before the prescribedForums, the Ex-President approached the Civil Court seekingRestraint directions against Evacuee Property Department notto evict him from the premises in question.

Ex-President died during pendency of Civil Sutt,.whereafter the Suit does not appear to have been prosecutedby any one on his behalf.

Rather than prosecuting the Suit, the petitioner appears tohave questioned the Custodian’s Order by its Appeal/Revisionfiled after more than one year.

The Tribunal treated the petitioners Appeal as Revision.condoning delay in its filing, but did not find any illegality in theCustodians Order taking the view that cancellation of allotmentdid not suffer from any error of law.

The petitioner nas not indicatea any ground in the Writ.Petition on which it proposes to question the Order of Eviction,except saying that the petitioner cannot be evicted from thepremises in question without following due procedureprescribed by law.

Petitioners Ex-President, having not contested the.Eviction Notice and resultant Eviction Order during his life time,the petitioners plea that the respondents may not evict itwithout adopting due course of law Is found without merit, for,the respondents had proceeded against the allottee afterfollowing the procedure prescribed by law. They are not evictingit without adopting due course of law, as alleged by thepetitioner.

There is no substance in the VWVrit Petition, whicn Isaccordingly, dismissed. |

JAMMU25.11.2011Pawan Chopra

(J.P. SINGH)JUDGE.