ORDER :

1. Amendment allowed.

2. By way of present appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, challenge is to the common oral judgment dated 01.05.2023, by which, the judgment and order passed by the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, in various civil appeals, exercising its powers under Sec. 9 of the Gujarat Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1972, came to be dismissed confirming the order passed by the authority evicting the petitioners from the government land under the aforesaid provisions.

3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Krutik Parikh, has raised preliminary objection about maintainability of the appeals, and therefore, this issue has to be decided first at this stage.

3.1 Mr. Krutik Parikh, learned AGP, would submit that the officers authorized under the Public Premises Act has taken out proceedings under the aforesaid Act and passed an order of evicting the respective appellants having found in unauthorized occupation of government property. The said order was challenged by the appellants by various appeals under Sec. 9 of the Act. Appeals came to be dismissed by respective orders. As per Sec. 10, the decision of the Appellate Court, being the Ahmedabad City Civil Court, since the property is situated in the city of Ahmedabad have become final, the appellants filed captioned writ petition challenging the same. The said decision was upheld by dismissing the petitions. He would submit that under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, the appeal would be maintainable only if the learned Single Judge has exercised or refused to exercise his jurisdiction under Article 226 and/or 227 of the Constitution of India. The present proceedings are purely under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, and therefore, the appeals are not maintainable. In support of his submissions, he has relied upon common oral order dated 24.08.2022 passed by the Division Bench of this Court rendered in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1680 of 2019 and allied appeals by taking us through paragraphs 9, 10 and 11 and the issues raised by the Division Bench of this Court, he would submit that it has been held that as such, the Letters Patent Appeals would not be maintainable in such proceedings which arises from provisions of judgment delivered by the Appellat Court established under Sec. 9 of the Public Premises Eviction Act. He would submit that the Division Bench has relied upon a decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court and has categorically held that such appeal would not be maintainable. He, therefore, would submit that the appeal be dismissed only on this ground.

4. On the other hand, Mr. Y.N. Ravani, learned counsel appearing with Mr. G.R. Manav, learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the petitions filed by the present appellants is not only under Article 227 of the Constitution but is also under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. He would further submit that the authority has passed the order without following the due process of law, and therefore, the Appellate Authority can exercise its power under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. He, therefore, would submit that the appeals be heard on merits.

5. We have heard learned counsels appearing for the respective parties. The fact remains that the orders came to be passed by the authority under the Gujarat Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1972, by which the appellants were declared having occupied the government properties illegally, and therefore, the same were ordered to be evicted. The said decision was challenged under Sec. 9 of the Act. The appeals came to be dismissed, wherein, all such contentions were raised. The learned Single Judge has also examined the issue arising from the judgment of City Civil Court at Ahmedabad, though made by exercising powers under Sec. 9 of the Gujarat Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1972. The orders passed by the Appellate Authority becomes final as per Sec. 10, and therefore, both th