- (1.) The Petitioner, Smt. Jamni Devi, is aggrieved by a notice dated 08.11.1976 issued to her Under the provisions of Sub -rule (1) and Sub -rule (2) of Rule 155 of the Defense and Internal Security of India Rules, requiring her to remove her occupation from plot No. 91/5 Bania Bazar, Dehradun within fourteen days of the receipt of notice by her.
(2.) Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present petition are that Petitioner's husband, Nandu Singh was allotted premises No. 5 located on plot No. 91/5, Bania Bazar, Dehradun in the year 1955. Subsequently the Estate Officer initiated proceedings for Petitioner's eviction Under Sec. 5(1) of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 and directed that she be evicted from the said plot. Aggrieved the Petitioner filed an appeal Under Sec. 9 of the Act before the District Judge and questioned the order directing her eviction. In her appeal the Petitioner claimed that her husband had been granted permanent license by the then Commandant on 02 -02 -1959 and that in pursuance thereof he had built the disputed accommodation. He and his family had been residing in the said house since then. According to the Military authorities the license set up by the Petitioner was invalid inasmuch as the then Commandant had no authority to grant the same. They also claimed that the said license had subsequently been revoked and in any case possession of the Petitioner thereafter had become unauthorized and she became liable to be evicted from plot in question.
(3.) Learned District Judge, Dehradun found that Petitioner's husband had actually been granted a license on 02 -02 -1959 and the same had been acted upon for more than a decade and a half. According to him even if the said license was not valid as a permanent license, it operated as a revocable license and that there was no evidence to show that it had been so revoked. He, therefore, concluded that unless the license dated 02 -02 -1959 was revoked, the occupation of the Petitioner could not be termed as unauthorized. In the result he allowed the appeal and set aside the order passed by the Estate Officer without prejudice to the case being taken up again according to law.;