Petitioners in each of these revisions are licensees in occupation of different shop rooms, all owned by the Cantonment Board. Each of them obtained the right from the Board directly or through the predecessors of the respective petitioners. According to the petitioners, on the basis of a license arrangement, on agreed terms, they or their predecessors were put in possession. The arrangement was styled as a license agreement by the Board. Petitioners have been regularly paying the consideration every month as agreed. According to the petitioners, they are conducting different businesses or trade in the above shop rooms and are exclusively depending on the income generated from such businesses, for their livelihood. The first respondent is the CEO of the Cantonment Board and the second respondent is the Cantonment Board, represented by its CEO.

2. According to the petitioners, first respondent, immediately after taking charge as the CEO, unilaterally decided to evict all the occupants from their respective rooms. Accordingly, he issued order dated 05.04.2017, stating that the period of arrangement has expired and directed each of the petitioners to surrender the respectiv