Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1999Raj334; 1999(3)WLC645; 1999(1)WLN552
..... of the delhi municipal corporation act, confers sufficient power on the commissioner 'to cause the removal of any structure which constitutes encroachment on a public place, even without notice to the trespasser. though, undoubtedly, the provisions of the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1971 were also attracted/applicable in respect of such place. the constitution bench of the hon'ble supreme court ..... , 1959 as the only due process, by which he could be removed, was under the provisions of the rajasthan public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1964 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act, 1964') as the public premises, as defined under section 2 (b) (ii) includes the premises belonging to an improvement trustestablished under the act, 1959. respondents nos. 1 and 2 contested the writ petition .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : 2002(3)WLN576
..... with a prayer that order dated 28.2.84 passed by the estate officer, devasthandepartment (annex. 5) at page 24 by which eviction of the petitioner from the temple in question was ordered under section 5 of the rajasthan public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupant) act, 1964 (herein after referred to as the act of 1964) and the judgment dated 3.12.91 passed ..... in occupation by any person of the public premises after the authority (either by way of grant or any other mode of transfer) under which he was allowed to occupy the premises has expired or has been determined for any reason whatsoever.'7. it may be stated that provisions of the act of 1964 are applicable to evict a person whose occupation is unauthorised .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2003(6)BomCR112
..... by this petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india, they seek an order from this court striking down the provisions of section 3 of the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act 1971, (hereinafter referred to as the said act for the sake of brevity) on the ground that it is violative of the ..... act and the presidency small cause courts act on the other. the efficacy of the president's assent was limited to that purpose only. therefore, the public premises eviction act would prevail and not the bombay rent act.' thus, the supreme court has in clear terms held that the provisions of the bombay rent act do ..... it is stated in the letter that:- 'consequent upon your appointment as assistant general manager, premises and estate department, mumbai l.h.o., you will also be working as premises officer to exercise the powers conferred by section 3 of the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act 1971 (40 of 1971) as per the gazette notification dated 29th .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1991(1)BomCR363
..... monthly payment of rent. for brevity's sake, aurangabad cantonment board will hereinafter be referred to as 'the board'. the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1971, will be referred to as 'the pubic premises act'. the cantonments act, 1924, will be referred to as 'the cantonments act.' in the present petition, the cantonment board, aurangabad, is the petitioner. the person against whom ..... 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 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2003(1)ALLMR239; 2003(3)BomCR110; 2003(1)MhLj516
..... order dated 22-1-1998 has been passed by the assistant estate manager. the order passed by the assistant estate manager is not appealable under the provision of public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupant) act 1971.'this is not the same thing, as saying that mr. bhalerao, the officer who passed the order was not the estate officer ..... -2002 was based on the order of the estate manager dated 22-1-1998 and that order was clearly appealable under the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the public premises act). he pointed out that in fact in the impugned order, the c.a.t. has also accepted in paragraph 10 ..... utmost priority. ,9. mr. rana, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that c.a.t. had no jurisdiction to look into this controversy relating to the public premises. a specific ground (g) has been raised in petition no. 3936 of 2002 that the matter clearly falls outside the purview of section 14 of the administrative tribunals .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2008(6)ALLMR842; 2008(6)MhLj652
..... the principle judge of the bombay city civil court in misc. appeal no. 66 of 2005, confirming the order of eviction dated 13-4-2005 passed by the estate officer appointed under section 3 of the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1971 ('the act of 1971' for short).the factual matrix:4. the factual matrix reveal ..... that the petitioner is a tenant in respect of the premises situate at village no. 5, row no. 3, ground floor, jeevan bima ..... and that the construction of temporary shed which is shelter for her car is opened from all sides and does not constitute any building or structure forbidden by public premises act, 1971. the petitioner also pleaded that she has paid rent and produced documentary proof in respect of payment of rent for the period from september, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1988]64CompCas199(Kar); ILR1987KAR970
..... filed objections in the execution contending that on account of nationalisation of banks including the vijaya bank ltd., the premises became public premises within the meaning of section 2(e) of thee public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act and that in view of section 15 of the said act, the decree had become ..... sri santosh hegde, submitted that in view of the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1971, the present premises had become public premises within the meaning of the said act and that section 15 barred the jurisdiction of the court in ordering the eviction. the word 'public premises' has been defined by section 2(e) of the ..... 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 houses of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1990KAR1107; 1990(1)KarLJ338
..... district judge has the jurisdiction to dispose of an appeal presented under section 10 of the karnataka public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1974?'2. the facts of the case are these: the petitioner took a premises belonging to the municipal council, davanagere on lease for a term for the purpose of running ..... 1983. thereafter the municipal council issued a notice to the appellant to vacate the premises. as he failed to vacate the premises, proceedings were initiated by the estate officer appointed under the provisions of section 5(1) of the karnataka public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1974 ('the act' for short) calling upon the ..... petitioner to show cause as to why he should not be evicted from the premises. rejecting his objections to the show cause notice, an order was passed .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2000(5)ALD380; 2000(5)ALT96
..... 'act no.20 of 1968' are included, which makes it abundantly clearthat the notification refers to andhra pradesh public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1968. further, it is well settled that a notification cannot be set aside merely on the ground of mentioning of wrong provision ..... what is contended before this court, as already noticed, is that there is no such act called andhra pradesh public (eviction of unauthorised) act, 1978. this submission is wholly misconceived. no doubt, the andhra pradesh public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1968 was wrongly typed in the notification, but, immediately after the act, the words ..... order1. the petitioner impugnes a notification issued by the 1st respondent in exercise of the powers under section 3 of andhra pradsh public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1968 (for brevity, 'the act') vide g.o. ms no.253, municipal administration and urban development (11) .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1991LabIC213; 1994Supp(3)SCC694
..... the appellant determining the tenancy under section 106 of the transfer of property act and, therefore, action was initiated under section 5(1) of the public premises (eviction of unauthorised occupants) act, 1971 for short 'the act' for eviction of the appellant from unauthorised occupation. the appellant filed writ petition no. 2391 of 1983 in the delhi high court. the division bench summarily dismissed ..... power on estate officer to issue notice to persons who are in unauthorised occupation of any public premises to show cause why an order of eviction should not be made. unauthorised occupation under the act in relation to any public premises means the occupation by any person of the public premises without authority for such occupation, and includes the continuance in occupation by any person of the .....
Tag this Judgment!