bsb IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 6336 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 6336 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 6336 OF 2008 Shri Damji Dungarshi Gala ... Petitioner v/s The State of Maharashtra & ors. ... Respondents Mr.Pradip Kadam for the petitioner. Ms.P.S.Cardozo, A.G.P. for the respondent State. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: DATED: DATED: 12TH DECEMBER, 2008 12TH DECEMBER, 2008 12TH DECEMBER, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C.: 1. The petitioner challenges the order passed by the appellate authority under the Public Premises Act as well as the order passed by the competent authority. The competent authority had evicted the petitioner from the public premises based on the evidence before it. This order has been confirmed by the appellate authority. 2. The petitioner contends that his father had been allotted premises in the building in question where he ran a ration shop. He submits that the allotment of the 2 premises was earlier in point of time and it was only because the premises were allotted, that the licence to run a ration shop was issued in favour of the petitioner’s father. It is therefore submitted that the closure of the ration shop would not automatically affect the possession of these premises which, according to the petitioner, he is entitled to. 3. These submissions have not been accepted either by the Estate Officer or by the appellate authority. 4. An affidavit has been filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Police Railway (Administration), indicating therein that the premises were allotted for the Railway Police Employees Authorised Ration Shop. Then it is pointed out that the petitioner’s father was merely appointed as an agent to run the ration shop and had nothing to do with the premises. He was running a ration shop as a contractor of Superintendent of Police C.S. & W. Railway Police in whose name the shop licence was issued. 5. In these circumstances, I do not see any reason to interfere with the orders passed by the authorities below. 3 6. Further more, the petitioner has already handed over the premises to the respondent No.2 and is now seeking alternate premises under prayer clause (c) of the petition. Such relief cannot be granted under the Public Premises (Eviction) Act. 7. Writ petition rejected.