Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 8 (JK)

Manohar Lal v. State of J&K

2019-01-11

SANJAY KUMAR GUPTA

body2019
JUDGMENT : 1. Petitioner claims to be a Senior Active Leader and State General Secretary of SC/ST of BJP and belongs to Arnia Town, district Jammu. 2. The case of the petitioner is that his case for making formal allotment of Govt. Flat No. 18, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu, has been recommended by respondent No. 4 to respondent No. 3 for which till date an amount of Rs. 1,16,000/- has already been received by the respondents towards licence fee for the said quarters, but alas instead of making formal order of allotment in favour of the petitioner, vide impugned Communication No. DDE/)/199 dated 24.08.2018, the petitioner has been asked to prove his claim on the said accommodation, failing which, further proceedings in the matter (for eviction) shall be initiated. It is stated that the petitioner is a Senior Active Leader of Bhartiya Janta Party and is State General Secretary, SC/ST Cell of BJP and hails from Arnia Town, which town is continuously under the threat of firing from across the International Border and that he has no House/accommodation in his name or in the name of any of his family members in the City of Jammu or in the vicinity of Jammu City. It is further stated that petitioner was is in dire need of an accommodation in Jammu City, as the petitioner, in connection with his political activities has to attend party meetings frequently mostly in the City of Jammu and sometimes at odd hours, so it is not possible for him to reach his home in Amia Town. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner applied to respondent No. 2-Director Estates, Jammu) for allotment of Govt. accommodation in Jammu City and the application of the petitioner was duly recommended by Dr. Devinder Kumar Manyal, Member Legislative Assembly, Samba, vide his Letter No. DKM/MLA-S/111 dated 16.03 2015 addressed to respondent No. 2 with the recommendation to consider the case of the petitioner for allotment of Govt. accommodation. 4. It is stated that pursuant to the recommendation made by Hon’ble MLA, Samba, as stated above, respondent No. 4, vide his Communication No. DDE/3308 dated 18.03.2015 addressed to respondent No. 3, informed respondent No.3 that at that time Govt. accommodation. 4. It is stated that pursuant to the recommendation made by Hon’ble MLA, Samba, as stated above, respondent No. 4, vide his Communication No. DDE/3308 dated 18.03.2015 addressed to respondent No. 3, informed respondent No.3 that at that time Govt. Flat No. 18, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu is lying vacant and that the same might kindly be considered for allotment in favour of the petitioner on payment of licence fee under Rules, so that revenue shall be realized. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that on 14.05.2015 petitioner also represented before Hon’ble MOS Forest, Animal Husbandry, PHE Irrigation and Flood Control, J&K State for allotment of a Govt. accommodation in Jammu City in view of the political activities being undertaken by him. The said representation was endorsed to respondent No. 3 for taking appropriate action on the representation of the petitioner. Thereafter, Govt. Flat No. 18, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu, was allotted to the possession of the same was taken on 16.03.2015.11. 6. It is further stated that in the year 2016, a letter was written by respondent No. 4 vide his No. DDE/J/1693 dated 23.11.2016 asking the petitioner to clear the arrears of licence fee amounting to Rs. 55,900/-outstanding against the petitioner up to ending 10, 2016 and in response to the same the petitioner deposited the outstanding amount of licence fee with the respondent No. 3, vide Receipt No. 8494830 dated 20.01.2017. 7. The petitioner is aggrieved of the impugned communication No. DDE/J/199 dated 24.08.2018 of respondent No. 4 by virtue of which petitioner has been asked to prove his claim supported by documentary evidence for claiming accommodation to Govt. Flat No. 18, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu. It is stated that the said impugned Communication dated 24.08.2018 is not a notice under Section 4 of the J&K Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act as amended up to date. It is further stated that the respondents have been charging licence fee from the petitioner @ Rs. 2760/- per month and the petitioner has already paid more than Rs.1,16,000/- and obtained receipts against the payment made. It is stated that petitioner has occupied Govt. It is further stated that the respondents have been charging licence fee from the petitioner @ Rs. 2760/- per month and the petitioner has already paid more than Rs.1,16,000/- and obtained receipts against the payment made. It is stated that petitioner has occupied Govt. Flat 18, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu pursuant to recommendation made by respondent No. 4 to respondent No. 3, therefore, petitioner cannot be set to be in unauthorized occupation in relation to the said public premises as defined under Section 2 (g) of the J&K Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1988. 8. During the course of the arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would feel satisfied, if respondents are directed not to evict the petitioner from the above said Govt. accommodation without adopting due course of law. Submission made is considered. There is no legal impediment in granting such relief. 9. Mr. SS Nanda, learned Sr. AAG appearing for the official respondents states that he has no objection, in case, submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is allowed. 10. In view of the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and in the facts of the case, the instant petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents not to evict the petitioner from the Govt. accommodation in question without adopting due course of law, i.e., as per the provisions of J&K Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1988 or other law on the subject. 11. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.