TMI Blog2001 (12) TMI 882X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty issued a show- cause notice to the occupants under sub-section (2) of section 4 of the Act, on 26th November, 1979 and the former however, dropped the proceeding by an order dated December 16, 1980. The State Government being dissatisfied therewith preferred an appeal under section 7 of the Act to the Principal Judge of the City Civil Court, Bombay, wherein a preliminary objection was raised by the occupants as to the maintainability of the appeal. The objection, however, was overruled by the learned Judge and thereupon the respondents herein moved the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution: the High Court in its turn allowed the writ petition upon recording inter alia the following : neither under section 7 of the Act nor under any other provisions of the enactment, a right to prefer an appeal against any of the decisions of the competent authority has been conferred on the State Government. Incidentally, it be noted that the introduction of the legislation (Bombay Public Premises Act) on to the Statute Book was effected solely with the purpose of empowering the Government to evict the unauthorised occupants from its property without taking recourse to any len ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the person authorised to occupy any Government premises, has whether before or after the commencement of this Act- (i) not paid rent lawfully due from him in respect of such premises for a period of more than two months, or (ii) sub-let the whole or any part of such premises, without the permission of the State Government, or the competent authority, or the officer who has or in whose name the premises are taken on behalf of the State Government or any other officer designated by the State government in this behalf, or (iia) committed, or is committing, such acts of waste as are likely to diminish materially the value, or impair substantially the utility, or the premises, or (iii) otherwise acted in contravention of any of the terms, express or implied, under which he is authorised to occupy such premises, or (b) that any person is in unauthorised occupation of any government premises, or (c) that any Government premises named are required for any other government purposes, the competent authority may by notice served (i) by post, or (ii) by affixing a copy of it on the outer door or some other conspicuous part of such premises, or (iii) in such other manner as m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed occupation of any Government premises, the competent authority may, in the manner and having regard to the principles of assessment of damages, prescribed, assess such damages on account of the use and occupation of the premises as it may deem fit, and may by notice served (I) by post or (ii) by affixing a copy of it on the outer door or some other conspicuous part of such premises, or (iii) in such other manner as may be prescribed, order that person to pay the damages within such time as may be specified in the notice. If such person refuses or fails to pay the damages within the time specified in the notice, the damages may be recovered from him as arrears of land revenue. (3) No order shall be made under sub-section (2) until after the issue of a notice in writing to the person calling on him to show cause, within a reasonable period to be specified in such notice, why such order should not be made, and until his objections, if any, and any evidence he may produce in support of the same, have been considered by the competent authority. Section 6: Rent to be recovered by deduction from salary or wages of employee. (1) Without prejudice to the provisions of Section 4, wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der under Section 4, within thirty days from the date of the service of the notice relating to the order under sub-section (1) of the section; and (b) in case of an appeal from an order under Section 5, within thirty days from the date of the service of the notice relating to the order under sub-section (1) or (2) of that section, as the case may be : Provided that the appellate officer may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days, if he is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time. (3) Where an appeal is preferred from an order of the competent authority, the appellate officer may stay the enforcement of that order for such period, and on such conditions as he deems fit. (4) Every appeal under this section shall be disposed of by the appellate officer as expeditiously as possible. (5) For the purposes of this section, Greater Bombay shall be deemed to be a district and the principal Judge of the City Civil Court, Bombay shall be deemed to be the District Judge of the district. This longish narration of statutory provisions stand out to be otherwise unavoidable for effective appreci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mines the monetary compensation for the land acquired and in the event the land holder is not satisfied with the quantum so determined, the Statute provides in terms of Section 18 an avenue to ventilate the grievance, namely, a petition before the Court: it is a right of appeal as such but the Legislature thought it fit and expedient to incorporate such a provision in the Statute itself offering an opportunity to a land holder specifically. There is no scope to read in the Section a right of appeal to the Collector and if we may say so no judicial precedents are required therefor. The Constitution Bench Judgment has as a matter of fact upon proper reading of the provisions of the Act come to a conclusion that the Local Authority for which the land has been acquired has the right to appear and contest before the Court and even adduce evidence in support of its contention and has the right to prefer an appeal from the Order passed in terms of Section 18 by the Court in the event the concerned local authority stands aggrieved by the quantum so fixed before the Collector, which cannot be termed to be a judicial proceeding or even a quasi judicial proceeding but with the filing of the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder indicate that it comprehensively covers all decisions reached by the Competent Authority under Section 4 or Section 5 that is what Mr. Dholakia contended and we find some force therein. Dropping of proceedings cannot possibly be termed to be 'not an Order': the Competent Authority issued the notices and upon offering an opportunity of hearing to the parties, terminated the proceeding by recording proceedings dropped if it does not denote the same an immediate inquiry would be then what it is? There is, however, no answer thereto. The proceedings initiated under Section 4 of the Act against respondent herein stands determined by an adjudication by the Competent Authority and the High Court thus clearly fell into error in not appreciating the factum of determination of the proceeding by the Order of the Competent Authority and it is on this score Mr. Dholakia contended that the attempt to distinguish between the Order and dropping of proceeding is wholly artificial and perhaps illogical since the Competent Authority did not accept the contention of the State Government and in fact refused to direct eviction which is also an Order passed under the said Sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f any person and examining him on oath or requiring discovery and production of documents but that does not take away the quasi judicial nature of the proceeding as a matter of fact it lends credence to such a conclusion. Summoning of witnesses by the Competent Authority or enforcing their presence can only be had by an Order of Court and not otherwise it is this specific power, which stands conferred on to the Competent Authority so as to allow the Competent Authority to proceed in accordance with law upon consideration of the relevant material : Proceedings dropped cannot but be equated with an Order of dismissal of the proceeding and the strenuous submission of Mr.Ganesh to the contrary as noticed above, we are afraid, cannot be sustained. The analogy drawn from the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act or the Income-tax Act is wholly unwarranted and misplaced and thus cannot be sustained on this score as well. The High Court's finding would render the Statute ineffective, which by no means can be permitted. The validity of the Act has not been challenged in this proceeding and as such we are not going into the same and in accordance with the golden rule of interpretation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
