The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for amendments in the laws and rules governing the occupation of government premises, realization of rental/penal rental, recovery of land revenue, commitment to civil prison, and means to pay to ensure uniformity and address discrepancies.

ORDER :

Regarding Union of India and Governments of all the States and Union Territories

1. Heard Shri Ranjit Kumar, learned amicus; Shri Gopal Subramanium, learned Additional Solicitor General representing the learned Attorney General for India, Shri A. Sharan; learned Additional Solicitor General representing the Union of India and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the States and Union Territories. Today, date was fixed for hearing the matters enumerated in paras 13 to 18 of the order dated 24-7-2007 and those referred to in para 33 of the order dated 2-8-2007, S.D. Bandi v. Karnataka SRTC, (2011) 15 SCC 709 but no response has been filed on behalf of the Union of India. Responses have been filed on behalf of only some of the States and Union Territories and not all.

2. Paras 13 to 18 of the order dated 24-7-2007, S.D. Bandi v. Karnataka SRTC, (2011) 15 SCC 718 referred to above, read thus: (SCC pp. 722-24)

"13. In relation to launching of criminal prosecution, learned counsel pointed out that if a Government servant, after he is called upon by a notice duly served upon him, fails to withdraw from possession of Government premises, he is said to commit criminal trespass within the meaning of Section 441 of the Penal Code (for short `IPC) as amended by Orissa Legislature vide the Indian Penal Code (Orissa Amendment) Act, 1986 (Orissa Act 22 of 1986) and liable to be prosecuted under Section 447 IPC. Section 441 IPC incorporating Orissa Amendment reads thus:

`441. Criminal trespass.-Whoever enters into or upon property in possession of another with intent to commit an offence or to intimidate, insult or annoy any person in possession of such property,

or having lawfully entered into or upon such property, unlawfully remains "there with intent thereby to intimidate, insult or annoy any such person or with intent to commit an offence,

or having lawfully entered into or upon such property, remains there with the intention of taking unauthorised possession or making unauthorised use of such property and fails to withdraw from such property or its possession or use, when called upon to do so by that another person by notice in writing, duly served on him, is said to commit "criminal trespass".'

14. From a bare reading of the aforesaid provisions, it would be clear that upon service of notice to vacate Government premises, if a Government servant continues to remain in occupation thereof, he would be committing offence of criminal trespass thereby and liable to be prosecuted under Section 447 IPC, which offence is cognizable as would appear from the First Schedule to the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "the Code"). In the present case, the aforesaid sixty-six persons are unauthorisedly continuing in occupation of the Government premises even after service of notices upon them to vacate, as such, the State Government would be not only justified but obliged under law to launch criminal prosecution against them under Section 447 IPC by lodging first information reports before the police stations concerned, which must be done within six weeks from today.

15. It appears that in the State of Uttar Pradesh also amendment has been made in Section 441 IPC by the State Legislature vide The Criminal Laws (U.P. Amendment) Act, 1961 (U.P. Act 31 of 1961) which is more or less on the same lines and the same runs thus:

`441. Criminal trespass.-Whoever enters into or upon property in possession of another with intent to commit an offence or to intimidate, insult or annoy any person in possession of such property,

or, having lawfully entered into or upon such property, unlawfully remains there with intent thereby to intimidate, insult or annoy any such person, or with intent to commit an offence,

or having entered into or upon such property, whether before or after the coming into force of the Criminal Laws (U.P. Amendment) Act, 1961, with the intention of taking unauthorised possession or making unauthorised use of such property fails to with