1 XIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NE\M DELHI Writ Petition (Civil) No. 960912009 & cM NO. 765 412009 Date of decision : November 30, 20L0 Y.S. JAMWAL ... Petitioner Mr. Naresh Thanai, Advocate Through: VERSUS Through: Advocates. ....ResPondents Mr. R. V. Sinha with Mr. A.S. Singh, UOI AND ANR. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL L. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? 2. To be referred to the ReporLer or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? GITA MITTAL. I For orders see W.P.(C) No. 1523912004. November 3O, 2OLO kr Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified *NS T]F]IE F]i]tGT{ COTJ]RT' OF' DE[,F]IN AT hTEW DEN.]H]I lo + W.p"(C) N@.115239/2OO4 & CM N@. 1110L1-/2004 ,,"'fk e of'decision: Novemhen-}), 2010 P.K. I(OUL .. Petitioner Through: Mr. B. L. Wali, Advoca[e VERSUS ESTATE OFFICER AND ANR. ....ResponclenLs , Through: Mr. Jatan Singh with Mr. Abhishek Aggarwal and Ms. Megha Bharara, Advocates. I\ND (2) Writ Fetition (Civit) No. 115240/2004 ancl CM No. 1LO13/2004 T.I(. OGI1A .. petitioner Throrigh: Mr. B. L. Wali., Advocate VERSUS ]]STATE OFTiCER AND ANR. ....Respondents T'hrctugh: Mr. Jatarr Singh wiLh Mr. Abhishel< Aggarwal and Ms. Megha . l3harara, Advocates. AND (3) Writ tretition (Aivit) No. tSZ LSlWq ancl CM No. tn_0Z6/2OAq A.K. MUKOO .. petitio'cr . VERSUS ESTATE OFFICERAND oRS. ....Ir.espo'clents Through: Mr. Jatan Singh wi[i: Mr. Abhishek Aggarwal and Ms. Megha Bharara, Advocates. w.P.(C) No.75239/2004 Page I of t57 ll"l AND (4) Wrf,fi Fetition (Civil) No. n 5246/2004 anal CM No. n-1028120A4 M.L.DULLU ... Petitioner Through: Mr. B.L. WaIi, Aclvocate VERSUS ESTATI] OFFICER AND ANR. ....Respondents Through: Mr. Jaban Singh with Mr. Abhishelc Aggar-wal and Ms. Megha . Bharara, Advocates. AND (5) Writ tretition (Aivil) No. 862/2004 ancl CM No. 736/2006 A.K. TRTSAL ... Pebitioner Through: Mr. Manoj V. George, Advocate VERSUS ESTATE OFFICER AND ANR. ....Rurpondents . Through: Mr. Jatan Singh with Mr. Abhisheh Aggaqwal and Ms. Megha Bharara, Advoca[es. .AND (6) Writ tretition (Civil) No. 1"524In@Aq and CM No. Itr 016/2004 T.S. BALI ES"IATE OFFICER AND ANR. ....Respondents Through: Mr. Jatan Singh wiLh Mr. Al:hishek Aggarwal ancl Ms. Megha Bharara, Advocates. AhItr (7) Writ tretition (Civil) No. n SZilMZAAL and CM No. ltr O$4lZA$q P.N. KACFIROO . Peti[ioner Through: Mr. B. L. Wali, Advocate W.P.(C) No.75239/2004 tl ... Peti'tioner Through: Mr. B. L. WaIi, Advocal,e VERSUS Page Z of 157 VERSUS ,IISTATE OFFICER AND ANB. ...Respondenl.s $li#fr#"ffii:,*"insH|SH ,AND (fli) Writ Petition (Aivil) No. L527gl2DDq and Ci\z[ No. ttr-050/2004 C.L.MISRI ... Pe[ibioner Through: Mr. B. L. Wali, Advocate VERSUS ESTATE OFFICER AND ANR. ....Respondenl.s Through: Mr. Ja[an Singh with Mr. ' Abhishek Aggarwal ancl Ms. Megha Bharara, Advocates.' AND (9) Writ Fetition (Civil) No. tr-5698/2004 ancl CM No. 1104412004 PFIOOLA RAINA ... Petitioner . (Wife of laLe' Str.f.N.naina) Through: Mr. B. L. Wali, Advocate VERSUS ESTATE OITFICEI1 AND ANR. ...Responclents Through: Mr. JaLan Singh with Mr. Al:hisheh Aggarwal and Ms. Megha Bharara, Advocates. A,ND . \ (10) Wqit Petition_(-qivin) No. n 77sl2OO4 ) and CM No. tr 557 /2AA6 .TEJ KISI-IAN .___r^ nr_- n__-_ ... pel.itioner Through: Mr. Samrat I(. Nigarn, Advoca.l.e VERSUS UOI & ANR. ...Responclents Throngh: Mr. Ravinder Agarwal, Aclvocate W.P.(C) No.L5239/2004 )L Page 3 .of 157 (3 AND (11) Wnib tretitflon (Civil) No. 2641/2006 & cM NO. 2379/2006 . ... Petitioner S'N'BHAT rhro.ugh: Mr. Manoj V. George, Aclvocate ' VERSUS ' UOI AND ANR. ....Responcients Through: Mr. Jatan Singh with Mr. Abhishelc Aggarwal and Ms. Megha Bharara, Advocates. ANE (112) Wnit Fetition (Civil) No" 568T?AA7 and CM No,. 1054712007 I M.K. TIKOO ... petitioner Through: Mr. R.K. Handoo with Mr. Yoginder Handoo ancl Mr. Manish shulda & Mr. Atul Sharma, Advocates VERSUS UOI AND ANR. Resnorrc]er"r rrrroush: ur. n. v. sintra *ilhff::fo.tott , Singh, Advocates. AND (13) Wni[ Fetitrlon (Civi[) No. 7Ob7nAA7 and CM No. 1342n lZOA4 C.L. RAINA ... pe[ibioner Through: Mr. Thakur Surnmit, Aclvocate VERSUS UOI AND ANR. ....Respondents Through: Mr. R. V. Sinha wiLh tUrl a.S. Singh, Advocates. W.P.(C) No.15239/2004 Page4ofl5T lL4 ANDII (14) Writ tretition (Civil) No. 2869/200S and CM No. 554O/2OO8 S.N. KAUL ... Pebitioner Through: Mr. R.I( I{andoo with Mr. Yogincler Hancloo and Mr. Manish ' Shukla & Mr. Atul Sharrrra, Advocates VERSUS UOI AND ANR. ...Respondenl,s Through: Mf. R. V. Sinha wiLh Mr. A.S Singh, Advocates. AND ' (15) Writ'tretition (Civit) No. 8599/2008 ancl CDd No. 16497/2008 KANTIAYANi GANJOO ... Pebitioner Throughr Mr. R.I( Flandoo with Mr. Yoginder Handoo and Mr. Manish Shulda & Mr. Abul Sharm.a, Advocates VERSUS UOI AND ANR. ....Respondent s 3ffin*:i""#ill v sinrra wiLh Mr A S A.ND (16) Wrir tPeririolr (aivix) No. 8600/2008 ancl CIVI 16499/20CI8 FI.L. KOUL ... pe[iiioner Througir: Mr. R.K. Hancloo with Mr-. Yoginder l{andoo and Mr. Manish Sliulda & Mr. Atul Sharma, Aclvocates VERSUS ....Respondents uoi AND ANR' Through: Mr. R. v. sinrra with Mr. A.s. Singh, Adyocates. W.P.(C) No.75239/2004 Page 5 of 157 AND (xz1 Writ tretition (Civil) No. 8601/20)08 1 J cM NO.. 16501-/2008 VIJAY MAM '.. Petibioner Through: Mr. R.K. Flandoo wi[h Mr. ' Yoginder l{andoo and Mr. Manish Shulda & Mr. ALuI Sharma, Advocal,es VERSUS UOI AND ANR. ....ResPonden[s Through: Mr. R. V. Sinha with Mr' A.S. Singh,"Advocates. . AND (nB) Wnit tretition (Aivil) No. 86411/2009 ancX CM No. 5796/2009 D.L. KAUL ;. r ,'.L. KAUL ... Petibiouer I Through: Mr. Samrat I( Nigam, Advocate VERSUS . UOI AND ANR. _.....ResPouden[s fhrough: Mr. R. V. Sinha with Mr. A.S. Singh, Advocates. AND (19) Writ Fetition (Aivil) No. 9609/2009 & cM NO. 7654/20q9 , Y.S. JAMWAL ... Pe[itioner *\ Through: Mr. Naresh "fhanai, AdvocaLe VERSUS UOI AND ANR. ....Respondents Through: Mr. R. V. Sinha with Mr. A.S. Singh, Advocates. AND (20) Writ tretition (Civit) No. I 1"g77 lzAAE .! 61 10986/2009 M.K. BAZAZ ... petitioner , Through: Mr:. R.K. Handoo wilh Mr". Yoginder Handoo and Mr. Manish Shulcla & Mr. Abul Sharma, Advocates W.P,(C) No.75239/2004 Page 6 of 157 VERSUS )T ,,"" r;;*"i,1"?l$?]t' . Abhishek Aggarwal and Ms. Megha Bh.arara, Advocates. A.ND (211) Wn"it tretition (Civil) No. 111548/2009 & c$4 NO. 1-L351/2009 B.L. TAKAROO .. Petitioner Through: Mr. Manoj V. George, Advocate VERSUS , UOI AND ANR. ....Responden[s Through: Mr. Jatan Singh with Mr. Abhishek Aggarwal and Ms. Megha Bharara, Aclvocates. (22) Writ tretition (Civil) No. 1n-488/2009 & cM NO. 1L2421244l9^ MOTILAL I(AUL .. Petitioner Through: Mr. B. L. Wali, Aclvocate . VERSUS ESTATE OFFICE& DIRECTORATE OF ESTATES, ....Respondenbs NIRMAN BI-IAWAN . Through: Mr. Jatan singh with Mr. ' Al:hislielc Aggarwal ancl Ms. Megha Bharara, Advocates. AND (23) Wnit Fetition (Aivil) No. n_1489/2009 & cM NO. I=n 244/2009 ' B.L. RAINA ... petitioner Through: Mr. B. L. Wali, Advoca.te VERSUS ESTATE OFFICER ...Responclenbs Through: Mr. Jetan Singh wiuh Mr. A-bhishek Aggarwal and Ms. Megha Bharara, Advocates. W.P.(C) No.75239/2004 Page .7 of '157 1'l AND (24) Writ tretition (C) No. 1lL49O/2009 . & C.Mo.No.L1L246/2009 A.K. GIGOO ... PeLitioner ESTATE OFITICER Through: Mr. B. L. Wali, Advoca[e . VERSUS : ....Responden[s Through: Mr. Jatan Singh wiLh Mr. Abhishelc Aggarwal and Ms. Megha Bharara, Advocates. COFAM: Fltolt'IBLE Ms. JLTSTTaE GIT'A MrmA.[,. 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowecl ' to see Lhe Judgment? ?. To be refei::ed to the Repor[er or not?. 3. WhethOr the judgrnent should be repor[ed in the Digest? W 1,. The instant case is a testimony [o even[s w]rich lead l,o an unprecedenLed ethnic cleansing of a rninority comm.uniLy frorn Lhe Kashrnir vailey on account of the inability of the SLate to 'irrobect them and tireir properby from violence, who, as a result, were reirclerecl homeless. such lurmoil was faced. by, [he rninority cornmunity in the state of Jammu & I(ashmir aftel: December, 1989, cornpelling its members l,o flee home, hearbh and StaLe for bare survival. These writ petitions have been filed by sotne of sur;It clisplacecl persons who were . central Governrnent employees seelcing irrotection against forcible eviction of the quarters oicupied by thern on the grouncl that it is the only roof available bo'thern. W.P.(C) No.75239/2004 Page 8 of 157 tl t, 2. The peti[ioners con[end thab bhose representing the Central Governrnenb in the Kashmir valley, especially those who were represenLing [he intelligence agencies, para rniliLary ancl defence forces as well as l,he Governrnent.rnedia l:ecarne prirne Largets of bhe rnilitants to the extent that lists of such persolls who hacl [o J:e targeted were published. ancl circulabecl in the localities. Fanrilv mernbers and friends of such Goverurnent employees were killed and their pr:operties destroyed for [he message to perrneate. As a. result, immediate stei:s for evacuation of such officials on emergency basis were taken by the Governmen'L of India in order to at least pro[ecb bheir lives. 3. Ihe wri[ petitioners in W.P.(C) Nos. 5681/2007, 2869, L5246, 862. 1.524L, L5264. L5279, L5698. t77912004. 264u2006.. 7 057 007 , 8641 9609. LT54B. LL4BB .LL4B} 11490 & 11491-/2009 wele sirifted from Jammu & Kashrnir to Delhi and posted in the local offices of the central organizalion and departm.enL.where they were employed. 4. The facts disclose that all the petitione::s (or the person on 'Whorn tirey were clepenclant as in the case of Srnb. Phoola Raina wiclow of Late Sir. T.N. Raina writ. petitioner in W.p.(C) No. 15698/2004) upon being brought to Delhi were alloLLecl Governinent accommoda[ion to reside'in, not only by virtue of their ernployrnent bu[ also their exlrerne neecl for shelter. These allotLees of []re cluar[ers, superannuated frorn service otl clifferent clates over the periocl of time. 5. W.P.(C) No.15698/2004 has been filed by Srnt. phoola Raina, widow of Late shri r.N. Raina who was a Gover-nmen[ W.P.(C) No.75239/2004 l1 008, Lt377 t200 Page 9 of'157 servttnb. Shri Raina was the allottee of Government accornmoclation bearing no. DG-91-5, Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi 2g. While sLiII in sewice Sirri T.N. Raina unforLunately expirecl on the 4'r'of August, 200L The peLitioner contends that laLe'Sh. T.N. Raina ancl family which includecl herself were cornpellecl to 'flee' from the vailey in circumstances identical to those of the other petitioners. This petitionep is sirrviving' on a meager pension and. she cannot afford any alternate accomrrlod,ation. 6. The peLitioner in W.P.(C) No.56B1-/2007 evacua[ecl in the same emergent conditions, is stated to be afflicLed wlth [he ,: Peirhinson's disease since his retiremenL. His home in I(ashmir sLands burnt. I-Iis relative, one Mrs. Chuni Lal had gone to retrieve irer belongings from Kashmir, but was shoL dead 'a[ point l:Iank range. The petitioner is statecl to be balely suwiving on his pension. He has no place to return in his horne s[ate. 7. So far as the 1re[itioner in W.P.(C) No.2B69l2008 ancl his fami.ty afe conCerned, they were shifLed oub by the GovernmenL on account of the perception of a serious threat to l,heir lives. IL 'is. conbended that Lhe rnilitants have burnt the p.etitioner's ancestral horne in order to dernonstrate'their intention of not sparing hirn. In addition, Lhey have shot deacl his,uncle dncl wife aL poin[ blanic range. As a result, other than the cluarter uncler occupa[ion, l,he petitioner is without eny alternate shel[er. . B. Shri p.K. I(oul, the peritioner in w.p.(c) No: 15239/2004. was a resident of Razdan, Kochhaa, Bana Mohalia, I-Iabba Kaclal, Srinagar and his entile property in Sri.nagar has been clesbroyecl by the communal riots and 'terrorist movernents. FIe cleallv . W.P.(C) N o.7 5239/2004 Page l0 of 157 1 s[ates that he ]ras no other house anywhere in Inclia. This petitioner was lastly posted as the Director General. with [he Borcier Secunty Force at R.I(. Puram, New Delhi' While in service, this petition'er was allotted the prernises no' I-I-52, Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi. On 3l-'t July, 2002, the petitioller supera.nnuatecl from service. The 'allotrnenL. of tiris accolrlnlodation in his natne was cancelled by a le[ter dated 27l28th August, 2002 with effect from l-'t Decernber, 2002 clirecting Lhe petitioner to vacaLe tltq accolnmoclal,ion imrnediately and he was informed thal. on failure to vacate, action to evict hirn und.er: the Public Prernises (Evic[ion of Unan[horisecl Occupants) Act, 197L would be [ahen. The responden[s also informed the petitioner thaL ou fai]rire l.o vacate, he wouid be liable to pay damage ren[ @ Rupees L50 per sq. ur[r. for bhe en[ire periocl of over sLay. The petibioner was perrnitLed to retain the accommodation from l-9r Decetnber, 2OO2 to 31't April, 2003 on payment of four times of the norrna] licen.se fee for the next two months. 9. Ttre petitioner and his farnily are permanenl. resiclents of the State of J&K and did not leave their home sl,aLe voluntarily but were driven out of the Srinagar valley. Their household goods were loo'Led ahd house.was burnt by [ire 'berrorists. Other" bhan the one residence, which also stands destroyed by. the rnilitants in Srinagar, Shri P.K. I(oul ownecl no other proper[y. A grievance is rnade that the respondents have tahen no actiou for the reconstruction of the. houses of the petitioners and ol.hers like hirn which were destroyed by Lhe miliLants ancl 'to rehal:ilitate them'r'esulting in a pitiable conclition and absencc V.P.fc) No.75239/2004 lt" Pagelloft5T of any security forj thern. Consequently, they are. unable [o returrl to their own hornes. 10. In this background, lhe petitioler su]:mittecl a rellresentation clatecl 24tI' March, 2003 seeking perrnission' frorn the respondenl. Lo retain his accommodaLion on payment of l,he existing norrnal license fee-setting ogt the al:ove facts. Despite per:uiit[ing retenbion of accommodation by other sirnilarly placed persons, this request of the petitioner was rejectecl by the let;ter cla[ecl 20tL February , 2003. The responclent ,ro. 2 fur[her ieferred [he case for eviction of the petitioner, Lreating him as an trnaubhorised occupant of pubiic premises under the lrriblic Prernises (Eviction of Unauthorised OccupanLs) Acb, L971,. 1,1,. In bhese proceedings, the following evicLion order cla[ecl 23'd Septernber, 2003 was passed against the petitioner which was served on him on l-Bh November, 2003:- "OFFICE OF THE ESTATE OFFICER AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF ESTATE (LIT.) DIRECTORATE OF ESTATES, NIRMAN BHAWAN, NEW DLEFII. EC/93/AD ILITI03IT-D All persons concerned and in particular Sh:i P.K. Koul, l-23, NorLh West Moti Bagh, Nu* Delhi Wh.ereas I, the unclersigned am satisfiecl for the reasous recorded below that Shri P.K. I(oul is an unauthorized occupation of the prernises specified in the Schedule belor,v l REASONS You have been continuing to occupy the prenrises sirecifiecl in bhe scheclule b-elow even atter its allormenu stands cancelled in your name w.e.f. L.z.o3 vicle letter: no. TD/2 B3/M -23196 dared 8.L1..02. You have failed to prove that you are no[ in unau[horizecl occupa[ion of the insLant premises. Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferrecl on me under sub-section (I) of secLion 5 of bhe public premises &t W.P.(C) No'.75239/2004 Page l2 of 157 (Eviction of unau[horized. occupants) Act, 1971" I hereby order Shri P.K. I(oul, and all the persons who rnay be in occupa[ion of the saicl premises or any par[ thereof to vaca[e the' same within 1-5 days from the da[e of issue of this orcler. In the event of refusal or failure [o comply with this ord.er wiLhin the period specified above, the said Shri P.K. I(ouI and all other pqrsons concerned are lia}le Lo be evicl,ecl from the said premises, if need be, by the use of such force as may be necessary. SCHEDULE 123, North West Moti Bagh, New Delhi. sd/- (8.K. Kulshreshtha) ESTATE OFFICER Date : 23.9.2003 Copy bo A.D.-T-D." L2. The pebitioner filed an appeal regisbered as PPA No. 33312003 challenging the said eviction order. Il, is conLencled that the learned Aclditional Dis[ricL Juclge nr.echanically clisrnissed. the petitioner's appeal by an orcler dabed L0u' September, 2004 ignoring the orclers passed by the Suprenr.e Court and oLher precedents of l"his court in respect of iclentically placed. persons, necessitating bhe present petition. , The subrnission is that the cancellation of the iretitioner's allotrnent by the leiLer clateci 27.28'h August, 2002; rejection of [he peLiLioner's request by the letter daLed 20tr' of Febluary, 2003; the order of eviction dated 23'd Septernber, 20Q3, as well as the order of the learned ADJ dated LOtr' Septernber, 2004 are legal.ly no b sustaintrble. The writ petition lays a chalienge to Lhese orclers as well as [he non-action of the respondents. L3. The facts relating to the otherpetitioners in bhis bunch of petitions are similar ancl are not clisputecl by the reslronclen[s.. For- the jlurposes of convenience and clarity, the cletails of W.P.(C) No.75239/2004 22 Page tj of t57 the ailoLrnenl, of accomrnod.ations which were effec[ecl in favour of the pe[itioners/the preclecessor in in[er'est; the dabes.of [heir retirement; the status of allotment and particulars of Lhe orders which have been passed against all dhe petitioners aircl. are inpu.gned in [hese writ petitions are tabulatecl below:- /s a---n f- v,firrlr - Date of R.etirenten tof ,4IIottee Cancellati I ott of ! sla-t--. 'Date of i Date of I 28.3.200s I 20.'I2.2oas I , Fetition .No. wP (c) No.1-5239 l2ao4 WP (C) _ No.B62l2 006 wP (c) No.1779l 2006 WP (C) No.1-524L 1200+ Quarter ,4IIotted H-52, Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi GI-BOO, Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi r-r-1.62, Sarojini Nagar, New Deiiri rz3lrv, NorLh Wesb Moti Bagh, New Delhi 499 A, Sector 3, R.K. Puram , New Delhi z-29, Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi LL15, SecLor-1, M.B. fioad, New Deliri Date of, impuEned order of ,4,IIotmemt 3L.7.2002 3r.1"0.2002 L.7.2002 3t.L0.2002 23.9.2003 | tO.g.ZOOrt 7.5.2002 7.5.2002 I0.9.2004 30.9.2002 7.5.2002 25.9.2003 i 10.9.2004 30.4.2005 L.9.2004 12.1.2.2005 I 3'1.1.2006 i3L.L.2006 r a.9.zooz 10.9.2004 1"L.7.2003 10.9.2004 1.2.1.2.2005 3 L. L0.2001 L3.2002 0.6.2002 W.P.(C) No.75239/2004 impucrnedl ' tke Euictiott I intparcmeal . Otder i order itt i Appeal 'l _.1 23.9.2003 | 10.9.2004 I Page 14 of t57 -l-- 2\ wit Fetition .No. Quarter ,A-IIot!:ed Date of R.etiremett tof AIIottee Date of intpugned otder of Cartcellati 'onof A-Itrotruettt Da{;e of I Date ot 1..2.2006 funpwanedl tke Euictiom I intpuqtted'. . 0r"der ! otder in I Appe.atr I wP (c) No.1-527 9/2004 wP (c) No.1569 812004 wP (c) No.2641 12006 wP (c) No.568L /2007 WP (C) No.2B69 12008 31252, ' ' Andrews Ganj, New Delhi DG 915, Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi MS/] 007, SecLor VII, M.B. Road, New Delhi Allotted Quarter in Delhi New Delhi 30.9.2006 3t.5.2007 31".L2.2007 3L.L2.2007 31..1.2.2007 I sr.z.zooa io.+. r sjga 1.9.199B (AlIottee Died while in service on 4.8.2001) 30.4.2004 3.3.2004 22.L.2002 L.7 .2004 25.4.2005 w.P.(C) No.15239/2004 wP (c) No.B599 /2008 , wP (c) No.B600 12008 New Delhi New Deliri WP (C) No.B60L /2408 New Delhi L0.1_ 1.200B 20.4.2009 3.8.2009 wP (c) No.B64L /2009 WP (C) No.11-37 7 /2009 BBO, Lal<shrni Bai Nagar, New Delhi Writ Fct{:itiort Nrt. wP (c) No.1L48 B/2009 wP (c) No.1148 912009 WP (C). No.11-49 0/2009 WP (C) Nct.1.149 Lt2009 wP (c) No.1154 B/2009 Qwarter A-trIotted Date of IX.etitenten tof ,AI.Iottee Date of innpugrned order of, Camceltrati on of AIIotment ' Date of intpuoned Euir:{:io.ta Qrder SI/38, Sadiq Nagar, New Delhi 30.6.2008 1.8.2008 9.3.2009 30.11.2007 21.7 .2008 19.1.2009 30.4.2008 1,8.8.2007 10. L 1.200 B 30.6.2006 1_.1_ 1".2006 1.8.6.2007 30.9.200s L.2.2006 1"8.7.2006 3L.08.2006 0L.0L .2007 28.Os.2007 30.04.2008 31..L2.2008 r o.og.zoog S- 1/6strL, M.B. Road, New Delhi a AB-837, Sarojini Nagar, New Delhi K-41L2, Sector II, DIZ Area, Gole Market, New Delhi 47"13N, DIZ Area, Sector 2, Gole Marhet, New Delhi wP(c) No.7057 /2007 x-224, Sarojini Nagar, New Deihi wP(c) No.9609 /2009 Qr.No.2 B L, T11re- IV, Sector-8, R.K.Prira m, New Delhi. W.P.(C) No.75239/2004 Page l6 of 157 e-f 6 Da[e'o,f ilte itttpwarunedt - ,t net inn I ,A.p,nacaX 25.8.2009 25.8.2009 25.8.2009 25.8.2009 1,.9.2007 Fetiti{iners' aon tentions L4. In these writ pe[itions, the petitioners have all contencled LhaL they are perlnanen'l, resiclents of Jarnrnu & I(ashrnir aild have no d.esir:e .whatsoever to resiclq in. Dellii. Flowever, on account of the pr:evailing circurnsLances ancl the inability of [he Government to secure Lheir lives and properLies in their home sLa[.e, Lhey are unab]e bo return to the state. Their proper:[ies .and. only homes in the valiey have eiLher been desbroyed or occupied 1-5. ' Passage of time . also has brought no change in [he conclitions prevalenL .in the state of Jarnmu & I(ashmi::. The petitioners rernain unable to leturn to their own homes. 16. Mr. R.K.I-Iandoo, Mr. B.L. Wali and Mr. Sarnrat Nigam, learned counsdls appearing for the petitioners, with alt [he vehemence al, tlr.eir cornrnand, have urged that Lhe sta'Lns of the pel.itioners stancls reduced to'that of 'refugees' in'their own coun"[ry with nowhere to go ancl no suppor[ at all from [he sta[e, the only clifference being that instead of being clisplaceci to anotlrer counbry, the petitioners stancl evicted wi[hin [heir own corin.[ry. 1'7. 'fhe petil"ioners have contended that cliscretion. and power is vested in the resirondents under SR 3I7-B-25 of the Allo[men[ of the ''Governrnent Residence (General pool in Deihi) Rules t.o per[iil, alry person to occupy public pr:ernises. Instances have been cited of the responclents perrnitting oLher persons inclu.ding identically displaced. Kashmiris l,o occupy public Preufses. IL is complainecl that the responclents have ulfairly failed to consider the special circumstances so far as the W.P.(C) No.75239/2004 Page 17 of 157 peti[ioners. are conce]:necl ancl have discrirnina[ed againsL thcrn. The wri[ peti[ioners t]rus assail the failure of [he respondents [o exercise the discretion vestecl in them to perrnit the petiLioners ' to conbinue, to occupy the quarl.ers, in accoldance with law ou the grouncl of arbitra::iness. 18. 'Ihe subrnission is thab the'refusal of .ilr.e respond.enbs to perurit the petitioners l,o retain the allotrnenb on paynren[ of ' norrnal license fee is illegal and. resulbs in violabion of the consLitutional rights of the petitioner as well as the cons[ibubional ancL public law obliga[ions, responsibilities an.d clu[ies of bhe respondents. 19. IL is subrniLted that in the given circumsl"ances Lhe pe[i[ioners cannoL be deemed to be in 'unauthorisecl occupa[ion' for the purposes of the application of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Acb, 1,97L. fhe petitioners contend that the respondents were cons[i[utionaily mandal-ecl to proLecL their right to life uncler Ar[icle 2]- of Lhe Constitu'tion of India and having failed to do so, were l:ound [o ensure the right to shelter of the petitioners, which is atl essenbial concornitanL thereof. In this bachgrouncl, the pel.itioners chailenge inaction qua the rights of the petitioners; [he legality and validity of the cancellation of [he allotmenLs of l.he cluarLers; as well as bhe proceedings and all orders undel the l?ubiic Premises (Eviction of unauthorisecl occupants) Act, 1'g7L. IL is coirtend.ecl that the responclents have ignorecl all relevanl, rnaterial in initiabing the proceeclings against 'the petitioners, passing the impugned orcler:s. J1 Page l8 ctf.l 57 R. e gpp o-g d e n t s c o n t e n ti o tt s. 20. Mr. Jatan Singh, learned Standing Counsel for [he Union of Inrlia and Mr. Il.V. Sinha, learnecl counsel for []re respondents challenge bhe very rnaintainability of these writ petitions. It is contenclecl that the public premises were allotted to employees of the Governrnent by virbue of tlieir employilenb. Such relationships having corne to an end on superanllua[ion/demise of the governrnent. servant, learnecl counsels sbrongly urge tl.Lal, bhe peLitioners tiave no right .ab aII to con[inue"to occupy the officj.al accommodation after their retirement. It is lurther urged Lhat the pe[itioners have no righL or entitlernent to auy racco.m.moda[ion froin the respondents. 'Ihe submission is thart bhe clecisions against the petitioners are in accordance wi[h [he provisions of the Act of L97L and judicial preceden[s on [he subjecb and cannot be faulLed on any legally tenaJ:Ie grounclS. ,Matefial pleadin{rs ',21,. Before exarnining Lhese submissions, learnecl counsel lor the petil,ioners have drawn attention to the petitioner's pleadings 'in grouncls A to H, K, L & M of WP @) IVo.Jr.5239/2004 P.I{. f,{owl Vs. Estate Office.r* ancl thc le.sponclents response [herebo whic]r cleser-ves Lo be useful.ly consiclerecl in extenso and reacls as follows:- Pag.e I9 of 157 W Gronrrcls "A'. Because the Hon'ble Stlprenne W.P.(C) No.75239/2004 3Vllg77 - Shri T.I-. Ors. 'Vs. State o,f .T&K_&_OrS,. has considered the cluestion, regarding l.he possession of the accommodation and adjourned the rnatter sine die and till tire Supreme Court- d"ecides Lhe matber finally, the Respondents cannot dispossess the PeLitioner from the premises