SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(MP) 235

A.K. Mathur, D Misra
C.J.
Jinda Ram
vs
Union Of India (Uoi)
DECIDED ON : 19 March, 1999

The revisional jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 115, Civil Procedure Code is not barred by the finality clause in Section 10 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, and the High Court can revise the orders passed by the appellate officer under Section 9 of the Act.

Headnote:

PUBLIC PREMISES (EVICTION OF UNAUTHORISED OCCUPANTS) ACT, 1971 - SECTION 9 - REVISION - SECTION 115, CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE - APPLICABILITY - Whether a revision under Section 115, Civil Procedure Code lies against the order of the appellate officer under Section 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971?

Fact of the Case:

The case arose from a reference made by a Single Judge of the High Court for decision by a larger Bench due to conflicting decisions on the issue of whether a revision under Section 115, Civil Procedure Code lies against the order of the appellate officer under Section 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that a revision under Section 115, Civil Procedure Code is maintainable against the order of the appellate officer under Section 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971.

Issues: Whether a revision under Section 115, Civil Procedure Code lies against the order of the appellate officer under Section 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971?

Ratio Decidendi: The Court interpreted Section 10 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, which provides for the finality of orders, and held that it does not bar the revisional jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 115, Civil Procedure Code. The Court reasoned that the District Judge, who is designated as the appellate officer under Section 9 of the Act, is a court subordinate to the High Court, and therefore, the High Court has the power to revise the orders passed by the District Judge.

Final Decision: The Court answered the question framed by the learned Single Judge in the affirmative, holding that any order passed by the appellate officer under Section 9 of the Act of 1971 is revisable by High Court under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code.

ORDER

A.K. Mathur, C.J.

1. This case has come up on account of the reference made by the learned Single Judge (Hon. S. P. Khare, J.) for decision by a larger Bench because of the conflicting decisions of the Single Bench of this Court. The question of law formulated by the learned Single Judge for answer by this Court reads as under :

"Whether a revision under Section 115, Civil Procedure Code lies against the order of the appellate officer under Section 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971?

2. The Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (for short the 'Act of 1971') was enacted for eviction of unauthorised occupants from public premises. The 'public premises' has been defined in Section 2(e) which reads as under :

"(e) 'public premises' means :-

(1) any premises belonging to, or taken on lease or requisitioned by, or on behalf of, the Central Government, and includes any such premises which have been placed by that Government, whether before or after the commencement of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Amendment Act, 1980, under the control of the Secretariat of either House of Parliament for providing residential accommodation to any member of the staff of that Secretariat;

(2) any premises belonging to, or taken on lease by, or on behalf of, -

(i) any company as defined in Section 3 of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), in which not less than fifty one per cent of the paid up share capital is held by the Central Government or any company which is a subsidiary (within the meaning of that Act) of the first mentioned company,

(ii) any corporation (not being a company as defined in Section 3 of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), or a local authority) established by or under a Central Act and owned or controlled by the Central Government,

(iii) any University established or incorporated by any Central Act,

(iv) any institute incorporated by the Institutes of Technology Act, 1961 (59 of 1961),

(v) any Board of Trustees constituted under the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963 (38 of 1963),

(vi) the Bhakra Management Board constituted under Section 79 of the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966 (31 of 1966), and that Board as and when renamed as the Bhakra-Beas Management Board under sub-section (6) of Section 80 of that Act; and

(3) in relation to the Union territory of Delhi, -

(i) any premises belonging to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, or any municipal committee or notified area committee, and

(ii) any premises belonging to the Delhi Development Authority, whether such premises are in the possession of, or leased out by, the said Authority."

"Unauthorised occupation" has been defined in Section 2(g) of the Act of 1971 which reads as under :

"(g) "unauthorised occupation", in relation to any public premises, means the occupation by any person of the public premises without authority for such occupation, and includes the continuance in occupation by any person of the public premises after the authority (whether by way of grant or any other mode of transfer) under which he was allowed to occupy the premises has expired or has been determined for any reason whatsoever."

Section 3 of the Act of 1971 deals with appointment of Estate Officers to initiate action under the Act of 1971. Sections 4 to 7 of the Act of 1971 deal with the procedure for eviction of such unauthorised occupants. Section 8 deals with the powers of Estate Officers. Section 8 of the Act of 1971 reads as under:

"8. Powers of estate officers. - An estate officer shall, for the purpose of holding any inquiry under this Act, have the same powers as are vested in a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), when trying a suit in respect of the following matters, namely :-

(a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath;

(b) requiring discovery and production of documents;

(c) any other matter which may be prescribed."

Section 9 of the Act of 1971 deals with a









































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top