JUDGMENT

VENKATARAMIAH, J. :— These three appeals by special leave are directed against a common judgment and order dated Aug. 27, 1980 of the Calcutta High Court in three Civil Rules Nos. 260-262 arising under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

2. The first respondent in each of these appeals is Deb Kumar Sen Sarma. He was working as a Sub-Inspector of Police, Calcutta in the year, 1977 and was residing in a Government building being flat No. 8 on the third floor of premises No. 20A, Lower Range. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Headquarters, Calcutta issued a notice to him to vacate the above mentioned flat forthwith as he owned a residential building in the name of his wife bearing No. 22/E, Lower Range, Calcutta-17 which was in the occupation of tenants, the appellants herein and another person by name Ahmed Hussain Molla. The appellants in each of these cases and the said Ahmed Hussain Molla were occupying under separate leases different portions of the building bearing No. 22/E, Lower Range, Calcutta-17 which was standing in the name of Sudha Rani Sen Sarma, wife of the first respondent. On receipt of the notice asking him to vacate the Government quarters, the first respondent got notices issued on Sept. 7, 1977 in the name of his wife, Sudha Rani to the tenants referred to above asking them to vacate the premises in accordance with S. 13 (6) read with S. 29B of the Act, Sudha Rani died on Sept. 27, 1977 and on the tenants not vacating the premises in question, the first respondent along with his son and five daughters (who were the heirs of Sudha Rani along with the first respondent) filed on Nov, 24, 1977 four petitions before the Rent Controller at Calcutta in R. C. Cases Nos. 10, 11, 12 and 13 of 1977 under S. 29B of the Act, which prescribed a special procedure which enabled a Government official who was asked to vacate a residential accommodation provided by the Government on the ground that he owned a residential accommodation either in his name or in the name of his wife or dependent child at or near the place where he was posted for the time being to recover possession of any premises on the ground specified in Cl. (ff) of sub-sec. (1) of S. 13 of the Act. The relevant part of S. 29-B of the Act reads thus :

"29-B. (1) No Civil Court shall entertain any application by a landlord being a Government employee, and who being in occupation of any residential premises allotted to him by his employer, is required by, or in pursuance of, an order made by such employer to vacate such residential accommodation, or in default, to incur certain obligations on the ground that he owns a residential accommodation either in his own name or in the name of his wife or dependent child at or near the place where he is posted for the time being, for the recovery of possession of any premises on the ground specified in clause (ff) of sub-section (1) of Section 13 but such application shall be dealt with by the Controller in accordance with the procedure specified in this section.

(2) Whenever any application is filed before the Controller by a landlord referred to in sub-section (1) for the recovery of possession of any premises on the ground specified in clause (ff) of subsection (1) of Section 13, the Controller shall issue summons, in the form specified in the Second Schedule.

...... ...... ...... ......

(7) The provisions of sub-sections (2) (3), (4) and (6) of Section 13 shall, so far as may be, apply to a proceeding under this Chapter but nothing contained in sub-section (3A) of Section 13 shall apply to such a proceeding.

(8) The Controller shall, while holding an inquiry in a proceeding to which this Chapter applies, follow the practice and procedure of a Court of Small Causes, including the recording of evidence.

(9) No appeal or second appeal shall lie against an order for the recovery of possession of any premises made by the Controller in accordance with the procedure specified in