Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: public premises eviction of unauthorised occupants act 1971 section 17 delegation of powers Page 1 of about 317 results (0.079 seconds)

The Secretary, Kamaraj College Vs. D.S. Arulmani, Reader and Head of D ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (2008)2MLJ593

..... court considered the effect of the presidential assent to the bombay rents, hotel and lodging houses rates control act, 1947, on the parliamentary enactment, viz., the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1971. by a majority, the apex court held (in paragraph no. 65) that article 254(2) of the constitution contemplates ..... in an aided institution by the college service commission by restricting the petitioners' right to appointment is a reasonable restriction in the interest of general public or not. the petitioners have a right to establish and administer educational institution. merely because the petitioners are receiving aid, their autonomy of ..... non-professional colleges, which cannot operate without the support of aid from the state. although these institutions may have been established by philanthropists or other public-spirited persons, it becomes necessary, in order to provide inexpensive education to the students, to seek aid from the state. in such cases, as .....

Chander Kanta Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Punjab and Haryana

Reported in : (1994)104PLR514

..... 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. ..... 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 .....

Pista Bai W/O Late H. Bhavarlal and ors. Vs. Bangalore Mahanagara Pali ...

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : 2008(4)KCCR2892

..... the petition, interalia, contending that the writ petitions and reliefs are akin to a declaratory suit and in the light of the proceeding for eviction instituted by the karnataka board of wakf - 7th respondent, under the karnataka public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1974, coupled with the pendency of the appeal before the karnataka appellate tribunal and 23 years having gone by since ..... ia-2/05 filed statement of objections denying title of the petitioner to the petition schedule premises and that proceedings under the karnataka public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, to evict the 3rd respondent is pending consideration. in addition, it is contended that 3rd respondent unsuccessfully challenged the eviction proceedings in w.p27111/95 which was dismissed by order dt. 19.7.2000 annexure-r2 .....

Union of India Vs. C.K. Saxena and ors.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : 2000(56)DRJ573

..... respondent had been cancelled vide letter dated 4.3.1997, without giving any show cause notice. the learned additional district judge held that proceedings initiated under the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1971, pursuant to the said order of cancellation, were illegal and of no effect. 3. respondent no.1 had retired as ..... respondent that, there has been violation of the principles of natural justice in passing the cancellation order and in initiating the proceedings under the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, the respondent had ample opportunity to raise his defense, if any, before the estate officer, prior to the passing of the ..... order of eviction. this apart, it was even put to learned counsel for the respondent that he could, even at this stage, point out any plea or right which would enable the respondent to retain the premises in his occupation. the learned dditional district judge, vide the .....

Indian Petro Chemicals Corporation Limited Vs. Air India Limited and O ...

Court : Mumbai

..... the proceedings are under public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1971. (for short ppe act). the petitioner states that it was ..... set aside the (i) notice of termination dated 10th/14th february 1995, (ii) the notice of eviction dated 19th april 1999 (iii) order of 2nd respondent and (iv) the order of appellate authority under the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, dated 31st january 2007 in misc.appeal no.261 of 2001. 3] ..... or taken on lease or requisitioned by, or on behalf of, the central government, and includes any such premises which have been placed by that government, whether before or after the commencement of the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) amendment act, 1980 (61 of 1980) under the control of the secretariat of either .....

Jagdishchandra J. Bumia Vs. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation a ...

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (1994)2GLR995

..... the interim relief is vacated. the court need not and should not ask the corporation to resort to the proceedings of eviction under the gujarat public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act and delay the eviction for more number of years. the petitioner who has obtained protection from the court for long 13 years must now comply ..... to vacate forthwith. the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the corporation can take appropriate proceedings in accordance with law for evicting by resorting to the gujarat public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act and it is also stated that some proceeding was initiated.7. in view of the interim order of the ..... court, eviction could not take place for long 13 years and the petitioner has continued to be in occupation by virtue of the interim .....

Budan Khan Vs. Estate Officer, Hyderabad and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Reported in : AIR1966AP336

..... of the constitution of india for the issue of a writ of prohibition restraining the 2nd respondent from proceeding with the ease of eviction against the petitioner under the andhra pradesh public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1961 (hereinafter called the 'impugned act').2. the essential facts in order to appreciate the merits ..... the retired government servants in the twin cities of hyderabad and secunderabad. it provides for summary eviction of unauthorised occupants from public premises and for the recovery of rent and penalty. section 2 defines 'public premises' to mean.'any premises belonging to or taken on lease or requisitioned by, or on behalf of, the government.'it ..... under the impugned act under section 4 if the estate officer is of opinion that any persons are in unauthorised occupation of any public premises and that they should be evicted, he can issue the notice. this involves the formation of a tentative opinion by the estate officer on such materials as he .....

Dr. J. Navneethan Vs. Director (Maintenance)

Court : Karnataka

Reported in : ILR1993KAR3404; 1993(4)KarLJ544

..... to, or taken on lease or requisitioned by, or on behalf of, the central government, and includes any such premises which have been placed by that government, whether before or after the commencement of the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) amendment act, 1980, under the control of the secretariat of either house of parliament for providing residential accommodation to any member of the ..... among other grounds has raised a ground that the petition filed for eviction itself was not maintainable in view of the provisions contained in the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1971 (for short 'the act, 1971'), as the act 1961 has no application to the petition schedule premises it being a public premises.the learned small cause judge heard the learned counsel on the question .....

Ashoka Marketing Ltd. and Another Vs. Punjab National Bank and Others

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1991SC855; [1992]74CompCas482(SC); JT1990(3)SC417; 1990(2)SCALE200; (1990)4SCC406; [1990]3SCR649

..... to deal with the squatting or spreading of goods on or against or in front of any public premises and removal of unauthorised constructions or encroachments on public premises. the public premises act was further amended in 1984 by the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) amendment act, 1984 whereby certain further amendments were made to provide for ..... oath; (b) requiring discovery and production of documents; and(c) any other matters which may be prescribed.34. rule 5(2) of the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) rules, 1971, requires the estate officer to record the summary of evidence tendered before him. moreover section 9 confers a right of ..... contained in the 1958 act. keeping in view the decision of this court in northern india caterers private limited's case (supra), parliament enacted public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) amendment act, 1968 whereby the 1958 act was amended and section 10e was introduced and a bar was created to the .....

Hari Singh and ors. Vs. the Military Estate Officer and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1972SC2205; (1972)2SCC239; [1973]1SCR515

..... high courts. secondly, the argument of the learned counsel for the appellants seems to me to rest entirely on the erroneous assumption that provisions of the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act 32 of 1958 were void for a 'contravention' of part iii of the constitution covered by article 13(2) of the constitution ..... broad reasons, to the position we have to consider in the cases before us : firstly, this court has not so far declared any part of the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 32 of 1958, to be a void piece of legislation, and, therefore, no question of applying article 141 of the constitution ..... the patna high court contained distinguishable features.7. in this context the appellants raised the constitutionality of the 1958 act. during the pendency of these appeals the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1971 received the assent of the president on 23 august, 1971. the appellants were allowed to add a new ground. the .....