Point of law: Framing a Scheme, under which the petitioner is not eligible, the plea that similar directions need to be issued to Airports Authority of India, is unmerited and is rejected.

JUDGMENT :

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J

CM No. 28544/2020

For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and the additional affidavit is taken on record. Application is disposed of.

W.P. (C) 7840/2020

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers:-

“In the light of the above mentioned facts and circumstances, it is most respectfully prayed by the Petitioner before this Hon’ble Court that it may be pleased to:-

a) Quash and Set aside the order passed by the Respondent No.1 dated 28.09.2020;

b) Issue directions to the Respondents to regularize the Petitioner’s allotment of Government accommodation at B- 57, Behind INA Market Colony, South West, and New Delhi- 110023 and charge her normal license fees;

c) Pass any other further such order or direction that this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the interests of justice.”

2. In effect, the Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to set aside an eviction order passed by the respondent No.1 and to direct the respondents to regularize her allotment of Government accommodation.

3. It is the case of the petitioner, and contended by her counsel Mr. Manoj V. George, that she was a government servant who retired on June 30, 2019 from services of respondent No.2/Airports Authority of India and is aggrieved by the impugned order dated September 28, 2020 passed by the Eviction Officer, Safdarjung Airport of respondent No.2 directing her to vacate the government accommodation allotted to her at B- 57, behind INA Colony, New Delhi-110023 within 15 days. It is submitted by him that the petitioner as a Kashmiri migrant is similarly placed like other government servants, who are retired Kashmiri migrants who have been granted retention of government accommodation even after their retirement.

4. It is submitted by Mr. George that the petitioner was appointed as the Telephone Operator in Civil Aviation Department by Director of Communication, Aeronautical Communication Station, Safdarjung Airport, New Delhi and was posted in Srinagar. The petitioner who was a Government of India employee was, on the formation of National Airports Authority w.e.f. October 2, 1989, absorbed in that organization. It is a matter of record that the Airports Authority of India, respondent herein was established in the year 1994 under the Airports Authority of India Act, 1994 and the petitioner became an employee of the said organization, wherein she continued to work till her superannuation. While she was posted in Srinagar, she was unable to lead a normal peaceful life having received multiple letters with threats to her life from the militants. It was in this background that the petitioner requested respondent No.2 to transfer her out of the State of Jammu & Kashmir. Subsequently, she was given posting at New Delhi and an accommodation was allotted at B-57, INA Colony, South West, New Delhi-110023.

5. It is stated by Mr. George that the petitioner in 2001 purchased a property bearing flat no. H-3, 2nd Floor, Plot No. 526 Shalimar Garden Extension I, Sahibabad, UP, by availing housing loan facility from respondent No.2. However, in 2010, owing to financial crunch and deteriorating health conditions of her parents, the petitioner had no other option left but to sell the property.

6. He also submitted that the impugned order passed by the Estate Officer/respondent No.1 is untenable in law. It is his argument that no fair hearing was provided to the petitioner so as to present her case on humanitarian and sympathetic grounds at par with the other Kashmiri migrants who have been authorized to continue in government accommodation even after retirement from service. He also contended that the petitioner is not an unauthorized occupant as defined under section 28-A (f) of the Airports Authority of India Act, 1994 as she has been paying the annual fees of the premises along with the electricity and water bills regularly and that the impugned order dated September 28, 2020 is bad in law and