( 1 ) FINDING conflict between two Division Bench decisions rendered in the cases of B. Jhonson Bernard v. C. S. Naidu, 1985 MPLJ 675 and Jenendra Kumar v. Roshanlal, 1994 JLJ 19, the learned single Judge made the following reference :"whether a retired Government servant, who acquires accommodation after his retirement and lets out the same to a tenant, is entitled to invoke Section 23-A of the Act?"

( 2 ) FOR the sake of convenience and clarity we would refer to the facts in Civil Revision No. 1349/96. The non-applicant/landlord, after his retirement from Government service made an application before the Rent Controlling Authority, Raipur on 16-3-1989 under Section 23-A (b) of the M. P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') seeking eviction of the tenant from shop No. 2 situate at Satti Bazar, Raipur, for commencing a business on the ground that no suitable accommodation was available to him for the said purpose. Leave to defend the case was granted to the tenant under Section 23 (C) of the Act. The Rent Controlling Authority passed an order of ejectment by recording certain findings. Before the learned single Judge, it was contended that the landlord had retired from the Government service in the year 1990 and thereafter constructed the accommodation in question and let out the same and hence, he does not fall within the specified category of landlord as defined under Section 23-J of the Act. In this context when two Division Bench decisions were cited, the learned single Judge thought it apposite to recommend a reference to a Larger Bench. That is how the matter has been placed before us.

( 3 ) THE core question that arises for consideration is whether a retired Government servant is entitled to invoke the provision enshrined under Section 23-A of the Act, if he acquires an accommodation after his retirement and lets out the same to a tenant. In this context, we feel it imperative to refer to Section 23-A of the Act. It reads as under :"23-A. Special provision for eviction of tenant on ground of bona fide requirement.-Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force or contract to the contrary, a landlord may submit an application, signed and verified in a manner provided in Rules 14 and 15 of Order VI of the First Schedule to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (V of 1908) as if it were a plaint to the Rent Controlling Authority on one or more of the following grounds for an order directing the tenant to put the landlord in possession of the accommodation, namely: (a) that the accommodation let for residential purposes is required "bona fide" by the landlord for occupation as residence for himself or for any member of his family, or for any person for whose benefit, the accommodation is held and that the landlord or such person has no other reasonably suitable residential accommodation of his own in his occupation in the city or town concerned. Explanation: For the purpose of this clause, "accommodation let for residential purposes" includes- (i) any accommodation which having been let for use as a residence is without the express consent of the landlord, used wholly or partly for any non-residential purpose; (ii) any accommodation which has not been let under an express provision of contract for non-residential purposes; (b) that the accommodation let for non-residential purposes is required "bona fide" by the landlord for the purpose of continuing or starting his business or that of any of his major sons or unmarried daughters, if he is the owner thereof or for any person for whose benefit the accommodation is held and that the landlord or such person has no other reasonablysuitable non-residential accommodation of his own in the city or town concerned:provided that where a person who is a landlord has acquired any accommodation or any interest therein by transfer, no application for eviction of tenant of such accommodation shall be maintainabl