Piara Singh vs Chandigarh Administration And ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 9197 P&H

                                                     Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:082934




CWP-13453-2023                            -1-                   2023:PHHC:082934


117           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH

                                                CWP-13453-2023
                                                Date of Decision: 03.07.2023
Piara Singh                                            ..... Petitioner
                            Versus
Chandigarh Administration and others                   .......Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ

Present:      Mr. Rakesh Bhatia, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL)

The petitioner has approached this Court impugning the order

dated 09.05.2023 under Sub-Section (1) of Section 5 of the Public Premises

(Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971, whereby, booth of the

petitioner was sealed without supplying the order dated 09.05.2023.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

petitioner was an allottee of the booth, whereas, the respondents have

cancelled the lease without complying with the statutory provisions. He

submits that the petitioner already assailed the same by way of filing appeal

before the Chief Administrator, U.T. Chandigarh, which is pending

adjudication till date. He submits that during the pendency of the same, the

impugned order dated 09.05.2023 was passed and his booth has been sealed.

He relies upon the judgment of this Court in case of Hakumat Rai Baluja vs.

Chandigarh Administration, Chandigarh and others, passed in CWP-5088-

1996 decided on 10.07.1996 and submits that the petitioner could not have

been declared illegal occupant during the pendency of the appeal filed by

him.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Maheshinder Singh Sidhu, Advocate and Mr. Rakesh

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:082934

CWP-13453-2023 -2- 2023:PHHC:082934

Sobti, Advocate, accept notice on behalf of the State/UT Chandigarh.

Leaned State counsel has strongly objected to the contentions raised by

learned counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that as per statutory

provisions the appeal is maintainable against the impugned order as per

Section 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act,

1971. He submits that the petitioner has not even availed the remedy

available under the statute.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the

record, it is is apparent that the petitioner has already filed an appeal before

the Appellate Authority against the order of cancellation of lease deed,

which is pending adjudication. In the facts and circumstances, the present

petition is disposed of with a direction to Appellate Authority to decide the

appeal filed by the petitioner expeditiously in accordance with law. The

petitioner would be at liberty to raise his grievances before the concerned

authority.

                                                  (RAJESH BHARDWAJ)
03.07.2023                                            JUDGE
sharmila            Whether Speaking/Reasoned     :    Yes/No
                    Whether Reportable            :    Yes/No




                                                      Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:082934

                                   2 of 2