SURINDER SINGH SIBIA Vs. HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Surinder Singh Sibia and his wife (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 respectively) have filed this revision petition in this Court against the High Court of Himachal Pradesh through its Registrar under section 397 read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against the order of the District Magistrate, Simla, dated June 25, 1987, in proceedings under section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) The facts alleged by the High Court while initiating the proceedings before the learned District Magistrate are that the premises consisting of main residential building, garage, servant quarters and open court -yard and lawns known as Kenilworth described in para -1 of the petition were requisitioned in favour of the High Court by the competent authority under the Himachal Pradesh Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), vide its order, dated July 30, 1979 and on the same date the physical possecsion thereof was handed over by the Tehsildar concerned to the High Court of Himachal Pradesh through its Registrar. These premises were subsequently declared as official residence of the Judge under section 22 -A of the High Court Judges (Conditions of Service) Act, 1954, and was occupied by Shri T. R. Handa who at that time was additional Judge of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh and thereafter the High Court started pacing the rent as assessed in respect of the said premises to the tune of Rs. 1799.75 p. per month. the petitioner No. 1 was a consenting party to this all.

(3.) Shri T. R. Handa, continued in occupation of the said premises till his retirement. Although Shri Handa retired on and with effect from February 28, 19b7, however, he was entitled to continue in occupation of the said premises by virtue of Rule -2 of the High Court Judges Rules, 1956, till March 31, 1987. He did continue to occupy the said premises even after the date of retirement. The rent in respect of the said premises was paid by the High Court till March 31, 1987 as usual. On March 24, 1987 when Shri Handa was still in occupation of these premises, the Registrar of the High Court addressed a letter to him requesting him that as and when he vacates the premises in question, the possession thereof be delivered to the Registrar of the High Court through his agent, the Court Officer, which letter was delivered to Shri Handa on March 25, 1987 and in fact a copy thereof was also delivered to petitioner No. 2 on behalf of her husband, petitioner No. 1, the owner of the said premises on the same day. Shri Handa vacated the said premises on March 25, 1987 and simultaneously with this vacation the High Court entered into physical possession of the said premises when the premises were locked both at the main gate and the main entrance of the building in token of having taken the actual possession of the premises. The furniture, fixtures, Sittings electrical appliances, and telephone etc. belonging to the High Court were still lying in the said premises at the time of the taking over of this possession on behalf of the High Court.