Back
T. AMARNATH GOUD
Utpal Datta – Appellant
Versus
Asst. General Manager (Hq) Bsnl Tripura – Respondent
JUDGMENT
T. Amarnath Goud, J. - This is petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of the Hon'ble High Court for quashing & cancelling the judgment dated 11.07.2022 passed by the District Judge, West Tripura, Agartala in Misc. Appeal No.11 of 2022. The petition has been filed for also quashing and cancelling the order dated 16.04.2022 passed by the Estate Officer, BSNL Tripura BA, Agartala (Asstt. General Manager (HQ) O/o the GMTD, BSNL, Agartala 799001. The petitioners also prayed for passing an ad interim stay order, staying the operation of the judgment, dated 11.07.2022 passed by the District Judge, West Tripura, Agartala in Misc Appeal No.11 of 2022 & the impugned order dated 16.04.2022 passed by the Asstt. General Manager (HQ) O/o the GMTD, BSNL, Agartala, whereby directing the petitioners to vacate the premises as described in the schedule of the impugned order, till disposal of the instant petition.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the Assistant General Manager (HQ) BSNL, Tripura by similar and identical letters, dated 29.12.2021 asked each of the petitioners to make immediate payment of Rs.73,05,111/- as outstand
The supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 227 does not allow it to reappraise evidence or substitute its judgment for that of an inferior court unless there is a grave legal issue.
The court established that the procedural requirements for eviction under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971, must be strictly followed, including the issuance of a no....
Writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 is limited to reviewing the legality of process rather than re-evaluating facts. Eviction upheld for breaches of lease conditions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the lack of authority of the Estate Officer and the maintainability of the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the dispute between the petitioners' claim as landholders and the claim of unauthorized occupation by the Estate Officer should be decided by ....
The main legal point established is that the nature of the right claimed and the absence of mention of agreement termination in eviction notices determine the applicability of the Public Premises (Ev....
The court emphasized that eviction under the Public Premises Act requires subjective satisfaction of unauthorized occupation, ensuring fairness in administrative actions.
The necessity for eviction must be justified in addition to establishing unauthorized occupation under the Public Premises Act, as reaffirmed by prior judicial interpretations.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
