IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.19916 of 2008 Date of decision: 14th October, 2009 Minakshi Sachdeva and another … Petitioners Versus Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh and others … Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. P.K.S. Gill, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Sanjeev Ghai, Advocate for respondents No. 1, 2 and 4. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) One Sona Ram Grover was allotted a shop on rent by Gram Panchayat, Badheri and Municipal Corporation, Union Territory, Chandigarh. Sona Ram Grover expired on 19th October, 2001. This fact is not disputed by the counsel for the respondent. The Additional Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh, on 24th August, 2004, cancelled the tenancy of Shop No.5, which vested in Sona Ram Grover. The order also says that Sona Ram Grover had appeared on 17th August, 2004 before the authority. The death of Sona Ram Grover had taken place in 2001, therefore, in 2004, he could not appear before the authority, as is reflected in the order. Therefore, the legal heirs of Sona Ram Grover were required to be served and heard before passing the order of cancellation of tenancy. The present petition has been filed by the legal heirs of Sona Ram Grover, tenant. When authorities intended to evict them they filed an appeal, but they failed. When their eviction became imminent, they Civil Writ Petitions No.19916 of 2008 approached the District Judge under the Public Premises Act and prayed that they be not evicted. Admittedly, no hearing was afforded to them. The tenancy was cancelled. Principle of natural justice demands that they should have been heard and afforded an opportunity to make payment of the arrears of rent. The order (Annexure P-3) says that Sona Ram Grover was heard in year 2004, whereas, he had actually died in year 2001, therefore, Order (Annexure P-3) is non-est and void ab-initio. Accordingly, the orders (Annexure P-3 and P-13) are set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Additional Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh to decide the issue regarding the cancellation of tenancy afresh, after affording the parties due opportunity of hearing. Counsel for the respondents submits that the legal heirs of Sona Ram Grover are pursuing the litigation at the instance of Ashok Kumar, who is in occupation of the said premises. Respondents will be at liberty to bring this fact into the notice of Additional Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh and satisfy the concerned authority in this regard. With these observations, present petition is disposed of. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE October 14, 2009 rps 2