- (1.) The petitioner has challenged the order dated 21.6.2006, passed by the Estate Officer, Chandigarh, whereby he has been ordered to be evicted from the shop in question, owned by respondent No.1, the Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent Corporation'), under the provisions of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), as well as the order dated 6.9.2008, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner against the aforesaid order has been dismissed by the District Judge, Chandigarh. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 5.7.2004, passed by the Additional Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh, whereby tenancy of the shop in question was cancelled due to non-payment of the arrears of rent and commission of breach of terms and conditions of the lease agreement.
(2.) In this case, the petitioner had taken the shop in question on lease/rent from Gram Panchayat Bedhari for a period of 3 years with effect from 1.12.1993 to 30.11.1996 at a monthly rent of Rs. 4,750/-, in an open auction. After execution of the lease agreement, the petitioner did not pay any rent. In the year 1994, the area of village Badhari was merged in the area of the respondent Corporation and all assets and liabilities of the Gram Panchayat were transferred to the respondent Corporation. Subsequently, when the petitioner did not pay the rent, he was served with various notices from 1998 to 2004 for depositing the outstanding rent. He was also called for personal hearing, but despite this, he failed to pay the outstanding rent, which came to Rs.7,71,425/- upto 30.6.204. Thereupon, the Additional Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh, after providing an opportunity to the petitioner to make payment of rent, cancelled the tenancy of the shop in question on the ground of non-payment of rent, vide his order dated 5.7.2004. Against the said order, the petitioner filed appeal and revision, which were also dismissed. Before the Appellate as well as Revisional authority, the petitioner did not avail the offer of making payment of the outstanding rent.
(3.) After cancellation of the tenancy, the respondent Corporation filed application against the petitioner for his eviction under the provisions of the Act, being an unauthorised occupant. The Estate Officer, Chandigarh, after providing opportunity to the petitioner, passed the impugned order of eviction against the petitioner on 21.6.2006. Against the said order, the petitioner filed appeal before the District Judge, Chandigarh, which has been dismissed. Hence, this petition.;