The court emphasized the need for timely disposal of eviction applications and clarified that unnecessary involvement of parties should be avoided.

Y.R. Meena, ACJ.-The petitioner-respondent is an ex-armyman. He filed an application under Section 16 of the Rajasthan Premises (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1950 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act, 1950) before the District Magistrate, Alwar for eviction of respondent No. 2 - appellant, from his house. After notice respondent No. 2 appellant filed an application under Sub-section (6) of Section 16, seeking leave to defend.

2. The District Magistrate, for the purpose of ascertaining the legal value ordered that let UIT and Nagar Parishad be a party-respondent. That order was passed on 17.07.2004. That order has been challenged by petitioner-respondent on the ground that Collector was not justified in making the UIT and Nagar Parishad as party-respondents and it is further prayed that application filed by respondent-appellant Mahendra Shastri under Section 16(6) be decided within statutory period of two months.

3. Learned Single Judge in the impugned order has directed to dispose of the application filed under Section 16(6), seeking leave to defend, within 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.

4. In appeal before us, the appellant has prayed that impugned order of learned Single Judge be set aside and order passed by District Magistrate on 17.07.2004 be upheld.

5. Learned Sr. Counsel for the respondents Mr. Mehta submits that purpose of provisions of Section 16 of the Act of 1950 is that in case military persons retired from their services, immediately they should get their house back from the tenant. There is summary procedure provided for eviction of the tenant from the house of military personnel. After application for eviction filled by the respondent, the appellant has filed the application under Sub-section (6) of Section 16.

6. Mr. Mehta, learned Sr. Counsel for respondents submits that once the application has been filed under Sub-section (6) of Section 16 for permission from District Magistrate to contest the application filed by Col. Raghuveer Singh Choudhary, that application should be decided within one month. He further submits that instead of deciding that application within one month, the District Magistrate ordered that UIT and Nagar Parishad should be party respondents in the application filed by Col. Raghuveer Singh. That is absolutely wrong. In the summary procedure, they cannot be made as party respondents, as they are not interested party and learned Single Judge has rightly directed that the application filed by the appellant under Sub-section (6) of Section 16 should be disposed of within 30 days from the date of receipt of his order.

7. On the other hand, Mr. B.L. Sharma, learned Sr. Counsel for the appellant submits that the application under Section 16 in this case is not maintainable as Col. Raghuveer Singh is not the owner of the house in question. The owner of the house is Mahendra Shastri. When Col. Raghuveer Singh is not the owner of the house in question and owner of the house is Mahendra Shastri, the application under Section 16 is not maintainable.

8. He further submits that while the application under Sub-section (6) of Section 16 has been filed by Mahendra Shastri-appellant and specially brought on record the fact that he is the real owner and annexed some documents of UIT and Nagar Parishad and Collector as well as the concerned officials of Nagar Parishad are made party, there is nothing wrong in it. In any case, the District Magistrate, if so, desires, he can enquire from the officials of the Nagar Parishad or UIT regarding the documents placed on record, therefore, there is nothing wrong in the order of District Magistrate.

9. No doubt there is a summary procedure provided under Section 16 of the Act, 1950 and under that Act if any military personnel retires, on his retirement, he needs a house, therefore, he can move a simple application before the District Magistrate concerned, where the property is situated, for ejectment of the tenant from h