JUDGMENT

Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J. - The petitioners have preferred the present writ petition seeking various reliefs, in effect challenging an order granting eviction under Section 5(1) of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as "the P.P. Act"), primarily on the ground of violation of natural justice. The petitioners were not parties to the said proceeding.

2. It is argued on behalf of the petitioners that, in view of the respondent no.1 having admitted that the petitioners have been in possession of the disputed premises, the petitioners were necessary parties to the proceeding under Section 5(1) of the P.P. Act. In fact, the respondent no.1 had sought an amendment to its eviction petition to implead the petitioner no. 1 (also referred to as "Big Bazaar") as a party to the proceeding, by an application dated December 12, 2014. In the said application, the respondent no.1 admitted the petitioner no.1 to be "currently in occupation" of the suit premises. However, vide order dated November 30, 2015, it was held by the Estate Officer that the impleadment of the petitioners was not "strictly necessitated in the scheme of the Act