Ravi S. Dhavan, J. - (1.) THE petitioner, the Managing Commttee, Balika Ucchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya (Commonly known as Atarra Balika Vidyalaya) has filed the present petition impugning and order dated 17 November, 1980, annexure "2' to the writ petition passed by the respondent no. 6, the District Magistrate, Banda, by which, in effect/the school which it runs from the building of the Zila Parishad, Banda, is required by the latter for permitting the State Government to tun she Government Girls Ucchatan Madhyamik Vidyalaya. This decisions of the District Magistrate, Banda, aggrieves the petitioner as between the school run by the petitioner and Intended to be run by the State, there is rivalry. In short, the issues in the petition are that given an occasion the Zila Parishad ought not to Invite the State Government to run a school from the building This building otherwise has been rented out to the petitioner by the Zila Parishad. THE lease between the petitioner and the District Magistrate, Banda contains the terms and conditions upon which the building of the Zila Parishad has been rented out to the petitioner. THE modality of inducting the petitioner as a tenant are contained in the lease deed and the conditions of seeking vacant possession of the premises are also Enumerated in the same lease deed.
(2.) AS needs of the public, inevitably, increase in every district, in reference to educational programmes, and Banda is no exception, it was indicated to the petitioner that the Zila Parishad building will be required for opening a Government Giris Intermediate College from the same building from which the petitioner, as a private organisation, is running a school. The communication by which the petitioner was intimated that the building is required for running a government school is the impugned annexure. The only issue is whether the impugned annexure suffers from any error which needs to be corrected by a writ of certiorari or any manifest illegality upon which the Court has good and sufficient reasons to quash it. The issue is not of eviction or vacating the premises but whether in principle there is any thing irregular in the request of the Zila Parishad to the petitioner to seek the premises In part or as a whole for a government run girls school. There is a communication by which the District Magistrate had even gone to the extent in letting the petitioner know that there may be a phased withdrawal from the building as an initial step and in case any student of the school run by the petitioner needs to be accommodated, the government school is under a commitment to absorbe those students. The issue before the Court is, thus, also not of any inconvenience to the students body in generality as the government has committed itself to grant admission to such students. The class rooms will remain, only the order which runs the school will change.
(3.) THE submission which has been made before the Court on behalf of the petitioner are (1) that the petitioner can only be evicted in due course of laws (2) that the Zila Parishad does not have need for the building and there is no occasion for requiring the petitioner to vacate it ; (3) that the State Government has started looking around for an alternate site to build another school, thus, it has no need for the present building for using it as a school and (4) a notice to quit as under the agreement has not been given to the petitioner, consequently the petitioner cannot be required to vacate the building. Noticing the submissions of the petitioner on the termination of the lease first, that there has been no notice as under the agreement may be alright in theory but not in equity. That this writ petition has remained pending for 13 years at the High Court is itself sufficient notice to but the petitioner on guard on what exactly the District Magistrate, Banda had intended in his letter dated 17 November, 1980. impugned in the petition. This letter is, in effect, the notice which the petitioner is looking for and more than six months notice to quit has been given to the petitioner. The petitioner has frustrated the District Magistrate's planning for chldrens need for thirteen years.;