M.R. Agnihotri, J.
1. This petition filed by Smt. Chander Kanta (since deceased) deserves to be dismissed as having abated.
2. Briefly stated, the land in dispute belongs to the Union of India-Ministry of Defence, and is under the management of Defence Estate Officer, Jalandjhar. It was, leased put for a period of five years to the petitioner-Smt. Chander Kanta, which period expired on 31st May, 1985. Since the lease was not renewed, she was asked to hand over possession of the land on 4th October, 1985, but when she refused to do so, proceedings under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, were initiated against her. Thereafter, the Estate Officer, Jalandhar, by his order dated 29th October, 1985, ordered the eviction of the petitioner from the premises in dispute. The appeal filed by her against that order was dismissed on 1st June, 1987, and the present writ petition was filed by her on 27th October, 1987.
3. Admittedly, the land in question belongs to the Central Government and it was only for a period of five years that it was leased out to the petitioner. After the expiry of the original lease period of five years, the lease was not extended. As such, the petitioner had no right in law to retain possession of the land in question beyond the period of five years. However, during the pendency of the writ petition, petitioner Smt. Ghander Kanta expired on 24th November, 1992, leaving behind one Vijay Kumar, who alleges to be her son. and on that basis, he prays to be impleaded as legal heir of the deceased petitioner : (CM. 1538 pf 1993).
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we do not find any merit in the prayer of Vijay Kumar. As the contractual relationship for a specific period of five years expired on 31st May, 1985, the deceased-Smt. Chander Kanta, stood, declared as unauthorised occupant of the premises under Section 5(1) of toe Public Premises, (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, I971 Thus, nothing remained which could be inherited by applicant Vijay Kumar, nor does the right to sue survives. C. M. No. 1538 of 1993 thus stands dismissed.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having abated, with no order as to costs.