Rajesh Kar v. The Assistant Director(Admn.) And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** CO/34/2024 Rajesh Kar Vs.

The Assistant Director (Admn.) and Anr.

Mr. Arul Prasanth .... for the petitioner Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty Mr. Dibesh Dwivedi ... for the respondents September 24, 2024 [SR] Item No.1 This revisional application is directed against an order dated 6 August, 2024 passed in Estate Appeal No.1 of 2019. Briefly, by way of a lease agreement dated 01 August 2011, the petitioner has been permitted to operate a canteen within the G.B.Pant Hospital Complex. The tenure of the lease agreement was initially for five years and thereafter by way of a subsequent lease agreement dated 24 March, 2016 renewed for a further period of ten years with effect from 01 April, 2016.

It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that during the tenure of the lease agreement, pursuant to a complaint dated 19 July, 2018 by the Assistant Director (Admn.), the respondent authorities have initiated proceeding under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971. Subsequently, a show cause notice dated 5 December, 2018 was issued to the petitioner and the date of hearing by the Estate Officer was preponed and an eviction order dated 31 December, 2018 passed.

During the interregnum, the petitioner has also filed a Civil Suit before the Civil Judge, Senior Division at Port Blair and is enjoying an interim order of status quo dated 3 January, 2019. The grievance of the petitioner in this application is directed against an order dated 6 August 2024 passed in an appeal being Estate Appeal No.01 of 2019 challenging the order of eviction dated 31 December 2018 passed by the Estate Officer.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that by the impugned order, an appeal filed by the petitioner has been disposed of by remanding the entire proceeding to the Estate Officer and setting aside the impugned order dated 31 December 2018. It is also contended on behalf of the petitioner that the Estate Officer has no jurisdiction to proceed and any steps taken by the Estate Officer is wholly without jurisdiction and authority of law. On behalf of the respondent authorities, it is submitted that the matter is at large before the Estate Officer and all points including the point of jurisdiction are to be decided by the Estate Officer.

In view of the above, CO/34/2024 stands disposed of by permitting both the parties to take all points available including the point of jurisdiction before the Estate Officer in accordance with law. It is made clear that there has been no expression on merits of the case and the Estate Officer is at liberty to adjudicate upon all issues including the question of jurisdiction without being influenced by any observation in this order. The impugned order dated 6 August 2024 stands modified to the above extent only. Liberty is also granted to the petitioner to raise the issue of pendency of the civil proceeding before the Estate Officer which shall be dealt with in accordance with law.

( Ravi Krishan Kapur, J. )