Jagvir Singh Goraya vs State Of Punjab And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 12300 P&H

                                                              Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:102581




CWP-28773-2013 (O&M)                           -1-         2023:PHHC:102581


211
      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                    AT CHANDIGARH


                                               CWP-28773-2013 (O&M)
                                               Date of decision : 08.08.2023


Jagvir Singh Goraya                                               .....Petitioner

                           versus

State of Punjab and others                                      ..... Respondents


CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ
        ***

Present :-   Mr. Paramjit S. Goraya, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

             Mr. Arun William, AAG, Punjab
             for respondents No.1 and 2.

             Mr. Karan Chaudhary, Advocate
             for respondents No.3 and 4.

             ***
RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J.

Petitioner has approached this Court praying for issuance of

directions declaring that respondent No.4 is a society and neither respondent

No.4 nor its property is a public property and the Public Premises (Eviction

of Unauthorized Occupants) Act is not applicable qua the shops No.1, 2 & 3

in which petitioner is a tenant and paid rent upto 31.03.2014 and for

quashing of proceedings under Punjab Public Premises (Eviction of

Unauthorized Occupants) Act 1973/74 pending before respondent No.3.

This Court issued notice of motion on 04.07.2014 and directed

the parties to maintain status quo.

It has been contended by counsel for the petitioner that

petitioner has taken on rent the shops belonging to respondent No.4 and was

1 of 4

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:102581

CWP-28773-2013 (O&M) -2- 2023:PHHC:102581

paying rent regularly. It was respondent No.4 who filed the petition under

Sections 5 and 6 of The Punjab Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized

Occupants) Act, 1973/1974 (for short 'the Act') for ejectment and recovery

of rent from the petitioner before the SDO (Civil) exercising the power of

the Collector, Gurdaspur. It is submitted that besides other grounds

contended in the petition, the primary ground of the petitioner was that in

view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal

No.1970 of 2014 titled as Dr. Suhas H. Pophale Vs. Oriental Insurance

Co. Ltd and its Estate Officer decided on 11.02.2014, the property in

dispute is not amenable to the provisions of the Punjab Public Premises

(Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 (for short 'Public Premises

Act') and thus, the petition filed by the respondent for its eviction is not

maintainable under the Public Premises Act. He has submitted that the

petition filed being not maintainable, the eviction sought by respondent No.4

is null and void.

Per contra counsel for the respondents has vehemently opposed

the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He submits that the

judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as relied upon by the

petitioner is totally distinguishable on the facts and circumstances of the case

and thus, is not applicable. He has submitted that the present petition is

totally an abuse of the process of the Court as the same has been filed only in

order to delay the trial pending before the SDO (Civil).

Secretary, Red Cross Society is present in person in the Court

and on interaction with the Court, he has submitted that the petitioner has

signed no agreement with the answering respondent, however, he is paying

nominal rent. He submits that rest of the persons to whom the shops were

rented out by them have entered into agreement with the

2 of 4

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:102581

CWP-28773-2013 (O&M) -3- 2023:PHHC:102581

respondent and are paying the enhanced rent as well. He has submitted that

the property in dispute is very much amenable to the provisions of Public

Premises Act and the present petition has been filed only in order to delay

the eviction proceedings. It is submitted that the petitioner is in the

occupation of the property without signing any agreement and is running

into heavy arrears of the rent to be paid to the answering respondent.

Heard. After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the

record, it is apparent that petitioner is the tenant who has taken the shops

owned by the respondent No.4 on rent. Respondent No.4 has filed the

application under Sections 5 and 6 of the Act. Record of the case reveals that

at one stage the parties were referred to the Mediation Centre as well by this

Court. The precise submissions made by counsel for the petitioner is

regarding the maintainability of the petition filed before the SDO(Civil) in

the light of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in abovesaid case.

There is no gainsaying that the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court

as relied upon by the petitioner is the law of the land and the petitioner has

every right to rely upon the same, before the Court of SDO (Civil) as well

where the petition filed under Sections 5 and 7 of the Public Premises Act is

pending adjudication. However the petitioner without raising any objection

regarding the maintainability of the petition before the SDO (Civil) has

directly approached this Court. Besides this, he has taken other grounds as

well which are totally disputed questions of facts need to be decided on the

basis of evidence to be led by both the sides. Thus, this Court is of the view

that the petitioner should be given the liberty to raise all his pleas before the

competent Court of jurisdiction i.e. SDO(Civil) where the petition filed

under the Punjab Public Premises Act is pending adjudication.

                                     3 of 4

                                                            Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:102581




CWP-28773-2013 (O&M)                         -4-         2023:PHHC:102581

The present petition is therefore disposed of with liberty to the

petitioner to raise all his pleas regarding the maintainability of the petition

and other grounds pleaded herein before the Court of competent jurisdiction

i.e. Court of SDO (Civil) where the petition is pending adjudication. The

parties through their counsel are directed to appear in the Court of SDO

(Civil) on 23.08.2023 who will commence the proceedings and conclude the

same as per law after hearing both sides within a period of six months from

today.

In view of the disposal of main case, there is no need to pass

any order in the miscellaneous applications and the same are also disposed

of.

08.08.2023                                         ( RAJESH BHARDWAJ )
m. sharma                                                 JUDGE

             Whether speaking/reasoned              :    Yes/No
             Whether reportable                     :    Yes/No




                                                           Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:102581

                                    4 of 4