COMMON ORDER

All the above review petitions arise from the common order of this Court dated 17/12/2019 in CRP No.318/2019 and connected cases.

2. Each of the revision petitioners are persons in occupation of different shop rooms let out by the Cantonment Board. Each of them obtained the right from the Board directly or through their predecessors by separate rental arrangements. While so, revision petitioners were served with notices dated 6/4/2018 invoking the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act 1971, issued by the first respondent in the revisions claiming himself to be the estate officer, under section 4(1) and 4(2)(b)(ii) of the Act. By the said communications, each of the petitioner was requested to show cause as to why the order of eviction shall not be passed against them. Separate objections were filed and after giving a personal hearing to the revision petitioners, by separate orders, it was held that they were in unauthorized occupation. They were directed to vacate the respective shop rooms before the stipulated time. They challenged those orders before the District Court, under Section 9 (1) of the Public Premises Act. All the CMAs were heard together