1. In this batch of writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, a short and interesting question of law has been raised by the petitioners. The contention of the petitioners is that the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act 1971

(P.P Act) does not apply to the premises belonging to the New Delhi Municipal Council (the Municipal Council), as such premises do not fall within the definition of public premises contained in Section 2 (e) of the P.P Act. It is urged that, consequently, the Estate Officer of the respondent Municipal Council has no jurisdiction to proceed to either evict the petitioners, who are occupying premises belonging to the Municipal Council, or to levy damages upon them by resort to the P.P. Act.

2. The petitioners have filed these petitions on account of issuance of orders of cancellation of the respective allotments made to them in Gole Market. In these cancellation orders the respondent Municipal Council has threatened the petitioners with action under Section 5 and 7 of the P.P Act. By orders passed in these petitions, the proceedings before the Estate Officer in each of these cases have been permitted to go on. However, the Estate Officer has been restrained from passing final orders. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have raised various other issues to impugn the cancellation of allotment. However, in case this Court comes to the conclusion that the P.P Act is applicable in respect of the premises belonging to the Municipal Council, and, therefore, the Estate Officer has jurisdiction, all other contentions could be raised by the petitioners before the Estate Officer. Consequently, the parties have neither addressed any other arguments in relation to the impugned cancellation orders, nor are being presently considered in this judgment.

3. Before articulating the submission of the petitioners in support of the aforesaid contention, it is necessary to take limited note of the transition of the relevant law. Earlier it was the Punjab Municipal Act 1911, which was made applicable to New Delhi. The New Delhi area was being administered by the New Delhi Municipal Committee (the NDMC) under the Punjab Municipal Act 1911. Chapter IX A was introduced into the Constitution of India by the Constitution (74th Amendment) Act, 1992 w.e.f. 01.06.1993. This chapter deals with municipalities. The provisions of Constitution (Seventy-fourth Amendment) Act 1992 were brought into force with effect from 1st June, 1993 and the laws governing municipalities all over the country had to be harmonized in consonance with the provisions of Part IXA of the Constitution by 31st May, 1994. Consequently, an Ordinance was promulgated on 25th May, 1994 incorporating the Municipal Council. Due to increase in population and more areas falling in its jurisdiction, the Parliament considered it necessary to form the Municipal Council for New Delhi. The Parliament passed the New Delhi Municipal Council Bill and the same received the assent of the President on 14.07.1994. It came into force as the New Delhi Municipal Council Act 1994 (44 of 1994). In the aforesaid background the said Act 44 of 1994 was deemed to have come into force on 25.05.1994 by virtue of Section 1 (3) thereof. Consequently, from 25.05.1994 it is the Municipal Council and not the NDMC which has been in existence. The NDMC ceased to exist upon the constitution of Municipal Council w.e.f. 25.05.1994, by virtue of Section 416 of Act 44 of 1994. By that provision the Punjab Municipal Act 1911, as applicable to New Delhi ceased to have effect within New Delhi.

4. Soon after the enactment of Act 44 of 1994, the Parliament amended the P.P Act. Amongst the various amendments, one of the amendment was in relation to Section 2(e)(3) wherein the words National Capital Territory of Delhi were substituted for the words Union Territory of Delhi w.e.f. 01.06.1994. Clause (iii) was added t