1. This revision petition has been directed against the order/warrant dated 14-6-08, passed by Custodian E.P. Jammu,by virtue of which respondent has ordered for eviction of petitioner from E P H.No. 819 situated at Mohalla Ustad Jammu. 2. Petitioner has challenged the order impugned on the grounds that the order impugned is against fact, law and deserves to be set aside. That mandate of Rule-14 of Evacuee Administration Properties Rules has not been followed and no show cause notice has been served upon the petitioner before passing the order impugned. That Rule-9 and Rule-18 of E.P. Rules have not been followed. 3. Brief facts emerging from record, necessary for deciding the matter reads that, evacuee house bearing no. 819 situated at Mohalla ustad was allotted to one Nazeer Hussain Semoni against the payment of Rs 30/- per month w.e.f. 1-7-08(BK). The said allottee did not pay any rent to the department, on the ground that said allottee filed an application u/s 8 of Act for deletion of property from the evacuee register before Custodian. The said application was rejected by Custodian on 8-3-1978 on the ground that the same was not been proved on facts. 4. Accordingly a demand notice of arrears of rent was served upon Smt. Semoni widow of allottee. That notice was challenged before Custodian General which was rejected. Smt. Semoni again challenged the order of Custodian General before Special Tribunal Jammu, that petition too was dismissed on 28-5-98. Thereafter, notice of arrears of rent was served upon Begum Occupant. Process server reported that, occupant has gone to Pakistan and house is locked and accordingly allotment was cancelled by Custodian on 6-11-03. It was further found by Custodian Dept. that possession of house has already been given to petitioner herein by occupant. The said Sajjad Mehmood, petitioner herein approached Custodian General for allotment. Field Inspect went on spot and conducted inquiry and it was found that original allottee has died and his widow has sublet the house in favour of petitioner. 5. From the perusal of file, it also appears that resident of mohalla Ustaad Jammu filed a complaint to Hon'ble Chief Minister, Revenue Minister and Custodian General, thereby making allegation against petitioner that petitioner herein has illegally occupied the house in question, whereas he has already two big/three storied house in the same Mohalla. It further appears that Dy. 5. From the perusal of file, it also appears that resident of mohalla Ustaad Jammu filed a complaint to Hon'ble Chief Minister, Revenue Minister and Custodian General, thereby making allegation against petitioner that petitioner herein has illegally occupied the house in question, whereas he has already two big/three storied house in the same Mohalla. It further appears that Dy. Custodian wrote to Custodian E.P. on 23-9-08, that petitioner herein is in unauthorized possession of house. Record further reveals that, inquiry against officials of evacuee department is also pending before vigilance organization. 6. The Custodian accordingly issued a show cause notice to petitioner for surrendering the unauthorized occupation of house no. 819 at Mohalla Ustaad Jammu on 13-6-08. Petitioner herein refused to surrender the possession, according a warrant under section 7 of J&K E.P. Act was issued. 7. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the whole aspect of the matter. 8. In the present case it is fact that allotment of original allottee with regard to property in dispute has been cancelled by Custodian vide his order dated 6-10-03. 9. Custodian has power to cancel the allotment in case an allottee sub-let premises to another person in term of Rule 14 sub Rule 3(vi) of evacuee rule. Petitioner herein is neither an allottee nor is in legal possession of property of E.P. Department. 10. So, in the present case as original allottee/occupant sub-let the property to petitioner, so Custodian rightly cancelled the allotment made in favour of original allottee. 11. Petitioner herein is in unauthorized occupation of property. Section 7 of E.P. Act and Rule 8 of Evacuee Administration Property Rules are relevant for deciding the matter and these reads as under:- Section 7 -- Power of Custodian to take possession of evacuee property vested in him. If any person in possession of any evacuee property refuses of fails on demand to surrender possession thereof to the Custodian or to any person duly authorized by him in this behalf, the Custodian may use such force as is necessary for taking possession of such property and may, for this purpose, after giving reasonable warning and facility to any women not appearing in public to withdraw, remove or break open any lock, bolt or any door or do any other act necessary for the said purpose. Rule 8 -- Procedure under section 7: (1) where a notice has been duly served on the occupant of the property under rule(7) and the possession is not delivered as required, a warrant of eviction in Form No. 3 under the signature of the officer who issued the notice or any other officer not below the rank of Assistant Custodian, may issue. One copy of the warrant shall be forwarded to the Police Officer of the Police Station concerned or such other officer as may be specially authorized by the Custodian for carrying out eviction, who shall forthwith take steps to effect the eviction with the use of such force as may be necessary. 12. A conjoint reading of both provisions, it is evident firstly a notice of show cause has to be served on occupant for surrendering the possession. In case occupant fails to surrender the possession, then a warrant of eviction in form 3 has to be issued. 13. In the present case record reveals that, petitioner was served with a notice for surrendering the possession on 13-6-08, and thereafter a warrant of eviction as per proforma given in Rule 8 has been issued as petitioner fails to response to show cause notice. Petitioner has been, so heard before passing of order of eviction. In this was no illegality has been committed by court below, so order of court below is correct and legal. 14. A person who is not in legal possession of property of custodian and is only a trespasser having unauthorizely entered into property, has no right to retain it. Custodian appointed under Act is like a administrator of Custodian Property and he has each and every right to protect the property belonging to Custodian Department from being trespassed or encroached. Custodian has right to manage and to keep the property of Custodian in order, for the benefit of evacuee. Custodian Department is deemed to be a trusty of evacuee property. Any person occupying, supervising or managing the property of an evacuee without the approval of Custodian is deemed to be in unauthorized possession. 15. In view of what has been discussed above this revision petition is dismissed. File of the court below is sent back along with a copy of this order. File of this court be consigned to record after due compilation.