JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner assails a decision of the prescribed authority directing eviction of a lessee of the first respondent from a property belonging to the first respondent. The prescribed authority exercised jurisdiction under the provisions of the West Bengal Government Premises (Tenancy Regulation) Act, 1976 to pass the order of eviction.

2. Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner as a banker lent and advanced diverse credit facilities to the fourth respondent. As a security for due payment of the credit facilities, the fourth respondent mortgaged the leasehold rights of the immovable property concerned in favour of the petitioner. The mortgage was created with the consent and approval of the first respondent. The first respondent did not issue any notice to the petitioner under the provisions of the Act of 1976. The petitioner was not informed about the decision to evict the fourth respondent from the premises concerned.

3. Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that, valuable rights of the petitioner stand effected by the decision of eviction taken by the prescribed authority under the Act of 1976. There is a proceeding un