WPMS/727/2022
2022 Latest Caselaw 1186 UK

                     Office Notes, reports,
SL.                 orders or proceedings or
          Date                                                COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No                 directions and Registrar's
                     order with Signatures


      12.04.2022
                                                WPMS No. 727 of 2022
                                                Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. T.C. Pande, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. T.S. Phartiyal, Addl. CSC, for the State.

As a consequence of the culmination of the proceedings, which were held against the petitioner under Section 4/5 of the Uttar Pradesh Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1972, the same ultimately culminated by the judgments, which were rendered by this Court in Writ Petition (S/S) No. 947 of 2012, Kailash Bhatt Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others, as decided on 13.12.2019.

Subsequent to the aforesaid judgment, it has resulted into an affirmation of the notices of eviction which were issued under Section 4 and since the judgment passed by the learned Prescribed Authority, as well as by the Appellate Authority has attained finality. It was thereafter, that the proceedings for eviction has been initiated against the petitioner under Section 5 of the Act, by passing the impugned order dated 28.03.2022, which has been put to challenge by the petitioner in the present writ petition.

Owing to the eminent threat of being evicted from the property in question, which had been illegally occupied by him, which has already been held to be a public property, the petitioner had made a mention in the morning today that the matter may be taken out of turn, which was accepted by this Court. The writ petition was summoned from the Registry.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in case if a reasonable time is granted to him to vacate the premises, he will have no quarrel qua the order dated 28.03.2022, which is impugned in the present writ petition.

Considering the candid statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner on behalf of the petitioner at the Bar, this writ petition is being dismissed with an exception that the time period provided for vacating the premises of 15 days in the impugned order dated 28.03.2022, is hereby extended by a period of two months from today.

Subject to the aforesaid exception, the writ petition stands dismissed.

Let a copy of this order be issued today itself as per rule

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 12.04.2022 Mahinder/