- (1.) THIS order shall dispose of LPA Nos. 1743 of 2013, 1763 of 2013, LPA No. 1892 of 2013 and 1967 of 2013. However, for the facility, the facts are taken from LPA No. 1743 of 2013.
(2.) THE aforesaid LPAs are directed against an order passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court on 3.5.2013, whereby the Writ Petition Nos. 6476 of 1987; 6960 of 1987 and 8018 of 1987 filed by the appellants challenging the order dated 9.7.1984 (Annexure P.10) passed by the Collector, exercising the powers under the Punjab Public Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1973 (for short 'the Act') and the order in appeal dated 12.8.1987 (Annexure P.11) passed by the Commissioner, affirming the order of Collector, remained unsuccessful. The brief facts leading to the present appeals may be stated.
(3.) THE Faridkot House Chaura Bazaar, Ludhiana belonging to the erstwhile State of Faridkot and vesting with the Pepsu on formation of Pepsu, was leased out to late Shri Jhanda Singh, father of respondent No.1 before the Collector, vide Lease Deed dated 30.2.1949. The lease period expired on 31.3.1950, but the lessee continued to be in possession. The tenancy was terminated with effect from 31.3.1964 after serving a notice dated 16.3.1964. An Application under Sections 4 and 7 of the Act was filed on 17.10.1975 against Daljit Singh, legal heir of the deceased Jhanda Singh and 34 occupants (Some of them are in appeal before this Court), the sub tenants inducted by Jhanda Singh. Initially an order of eviction was passed by the Collector, Ludhiana on 17.2.1981, but the said order was set aside by the Commissioner on 15.2.1982 and the matter remanded to the learned Collector to decide the matter afresh keeping in view the observations made therein. It is thereafter, the Collector passed an order of eviction on 9.7.1984, which was affirmed vide order passed by the Commissioner on 12.8.1987. Both the orders were not interfered with by the learned Single Judge. Still aggrieved, the present appeals have been preferred by some of the occupants. The appellants are resisting the eviction proceedings on the plea that they are in possession of the premises in dispute in pursuance of the agreement to sell arrived at before the State Disposal Committee, constituted in exercise of the executive power of the State, in the sum of Rs.3,50,000/ -. The appellants have deposited 25% of the sale consideration as agreed and that the appellants are ready and willing to perform their part of the contract. Therefore, they cannot be said to be unauthorized occupants liable to be evicted in terms of the provisions of the Act. The State Government constituted a Committee known as Disposal Committee "for disposal of the uneconomic and surplus properties of the erstwhile Pepsu State outside the Punjab" and any matter incidental thereto vide notification dated 29/31.3.1957 (Annexure P.1). The Committee consisted of the Secretary to Government of Punjab, Finance Department as Chairman; a representative of the Finance Department not below the rank of Deputy Secretary to be nominated by the Department; one representative of the PWD (B&R) not below the rank of Executive Engineer to be nominated by the Buildings and Road Branch and one representative from the Law Department not below the rank of Legal Remembrancer, to be nominated by the Law Department. On 8.8.1958, the Disposal Committee was renamed as State Disposal Committee and it was also empowered to deal with the "disposal of the uneconomic or surplus Government properties of the erstwhile Pepsu State outside Punjab, to deal with all surplus Government property in the custody of the PWD situated at Delhi or other places within or outside the Punjab State." The Committee was further to supervise and coordinate the work of the District Disposal Committee of which the Deputy Commissioners in their respective districts were to be the Chairman.;