D.N.PATEL,J. - (1.) This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by the original petitioner, who instituted W.P.(C) No. 3091 of 2014, which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide judgment and order dated 15.02.2016, whereby, an order passed by the Estate Officer, under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971 dated 06.10.2006 was confirmed as well as by the rejection of the writ petition, an order passed by the appellate authority i.e. District Court, Bokaro in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 23 of 2012 dated 12.06.2013 was also confirmed. Hence, this original petitioner has preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal. Factual Matrix Respondent is a public sector undertaking, owned, managed and controlled by the Central Government. Residential quarter, in question, was given on lease on 19.03.2002 (Annexure-3 to the memo of this Letters Patent Appeal); Residential quarter's constructed area was 1004 sq. ft.; Adjacent open land, ad-measuring 2466 sq. ft., which is alleged to have been encroached by this appellant and hence, notice was given under Section 5-A of the Act, 1971 for vacating the premises dated 06.10.2006; After notice was given on 07.09.2006 for eviction and the order was ultimately passed by the Estate Officer on 06.10.2006, this order was under challenge in the writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 5929 of 2006, which was dismissed vide order dated 07.02.2007 (Annexure-4 to the memo of this Letters Patent Appeal); Against the aforesaid detailed speaking order, Letters Patent Appeal was preferred being L.P.A. No. 98 of 2007 and the same was also dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.06.2008. Thus, the order of eviction dated 06.10.2006 was confirmed. Against which, civil miscellaneous petition was preferred and the same was also dismissed vide order dated 25.04.2012. Thereafter, old order of Estate Officer dated 06.10.2006 was challenged in an appeal being Miscellaneous Appeal No. 23 of 2012 under Section 9 of the Act, 1971 before the District Court, Bokaro. This appeal was dismissed vide order dated 12.06.2013 (Annexure-5 to the memo of this Letters Patent Appeal); Against this order, writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 3091 of 2014 has been preferred, which was also dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide judgment and order dated 15.02.2016 and hence, the present Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred. Arguments canvassed by the counsel for the appellant:
(2.) Counsel for the appellant has submitted that premises, in question, have been given on lease by the respondents vide lease deed dated 19.03.2002, which is at Annexure-3. So far as constructed area is concerned, it is 1004 sq. ft. and so far as open area is concerned, it is 2466 sq. ft. Both these premises are in possession of this appellant, as stated in para-11 of the memo of this Letters Patent Appeal. Appeal preferred by this appellant under Section 9 of the Act, 1971 being Miscellaneous Appeal No. 23 of 2012 was dismissed on the ground of limitation. In fact, there is no delay or there is a delay of only few days in preferring Miscellaneous Appeal No. 23 of 2012. On merit, this case has been decided by the District Court, Bokaro. These aspects of the matter have been properly appreciated by the learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 3091 of 2014 vide judgment and order dated 15.02.2016 and hence, the said order deserves to be quashed and set aside.
(3.) Counsel appearing for the appellant has also submitted that guiding principles, enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of "Banatwala and Company v. L.I.C. of India and another", reported in AIR 2011 Supreme Court 3619 , have been properly adjudicated at all by the learned Single Judge and hence, judgment and order, delivered by the learned Single Judge deserves to be quashed and set aside. Arguments canvassed by the counsel for the respondents:;