JUDGMENT : S.C. Mohapatra, J. - These two applications under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the initiation of two proceedings under the Orissa Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') involve common question or Jaw and as such were heard analogously. 2. The Petitioners in both the writ applications received notices dated 6-5-1982 u/s 4(1) or the Act from the Tahasildar, Darpan to show cause why they should not be evicted being in unauthorised occupation of the public premises described in such notices. Shortly after receipt of the notices, but before the date fixed for showing cause, they approached this Court for quashing the proceedings. This Court gave the interim direction staying operation or the notices. 3. The main ground of attack on behalf of the Petitioners at the time of hearing was confined to lack of jurisdiction or the Tahasildar to issue the notices as the premises in question are not 'public premises'. 4. The Estate Officer under the Act gets jurisdiction u/s 4(1) only where the, premises are public premises. Section 4(1) reads as follows: 4. Issue of notice to show cause against order of eviction.- (1) If the Estate office is of opinion that any persons are in unauthorised occupation of any public premises and that they should be evicted, the Estate Officer shall issue in the manner hereinafter provided a notice in writing calling upon all persons concerned to show cause why an order of eviction should not be made. 'Public premises' has been defined u/s 2(f) of the Act. It reads as follows: 2. Definitions - In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires- (a) to (e).... (f) 'public premises' means any premises situated within the jurisdiction of a Municipal Councilor Notified Area Council constituted under the Orissa Municipal Act, 1950 (23 of 1950) and (i) belonging to or taken on lease by State Government or any company or the Board, or (ii) requisitioned by the State Government. In order that a premises would be public premises, it is to be situated within the jurisdiction of a Municipal Council 01' Notified Area Council. 5. In order that a premises would be public premises, it is to be situated within the jurisdiction of a Municipal Council 01' Notified Area Council. 5. It is submitted on behalf of the Petitioners that Chandikhol Chhak where the premises are situated is not within the jurisdiction of a Municipal Council or Notified Area Council and as such the Tahasildar has no jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 4(1) of the Act. 6. A Municipality is constituted by the State Government u/s 4(3) of the Orissa Municipal Act, 1950 and a Notified Area is constituted u/s 417-A of the said Act by notification. 'Notification' has been defined u/s 2(28) of the Orissa General Clauses Act, 1937 to mean a notification in the Gazette. In spite of opportunity being given to the opposite party, the official gazette if any containing the notification constituting the area whereunder the premises are situated either as a Municipality or a Notified Area could not be produced. In the circumstance, we hold that the premises in question are not public premises. 7. III view of our conclusion that the premises are not public Premises, the notices issued to the Petitioners in both the writ applications by the Tahasildar, Darpan are without jurisdiction and are quashed. The Tahasildar, Darpan is directed not to proceed further on the basis of such notices. It may be stated that the other questions raised are left open. 8. In the result, both the writ applications are allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. P.C. Misra, J. 9. I agree. Final Result : Allowed