Girdhari Singh Thakur Vs Union Of India And Ors

Chhattisgarh High Court 9 Aug 2018 Writ Petition (C) No. 2238 Of 2018
Bench: Single Bench
Result Published
Acts Referenced

Judgement Snapshot

Case Number

Writ Petition (C) No. 2238 Of 2018

Hon'ble Bench

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J

Advocates

Upendra Bharat, Abhishek Sinha, Ghanshyam Patel

Final Decision

Dismissed

Acts Referred

Public Premises (Eviction Of Unauthorized Occupant) Act, 1971 — Section 9

Judgement Text

Translate:

Sanjay K. Agrawal, J

1. The writ petition is directed against the order dated 27.07.2018 (Annexure - P/1) passed by respondent No. 2 by which the petitioner has been

directed to vacate the premises.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order has not been issued by the Estate officer under the Public Premises (Eviction of

Unauthorized Occupant) Act, 1971 (for brevity, 'Act of 1971') and, therefore, the order passed is unsustainable and bad in law and is liable to be set

aside.

3. Learned counsel for respondents would submit that the Estate officer has passed the order on 22.08.2008 against which the petitioner had preferred

an appeal before the District Judge under Section 9 of the Act of 1971 which was dismissed by order dated 08.12.2016 against which Civil Revision

was filed by the petitioner before the Court which was dismissed by this Court by order dated 29.06.2018 and that order evicting the petitioner passed

by the Estate officer has attained finality and the Estate officer has already authorized the Railway to take possession of the subject land forcefully

against which the notice Annexure-P/1 has been issued to the petitioner.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the impugned oder and gone through the records with utmost circumspection.

5. The order of eviction passed by the Estate officer evicting the petitioner under the Act of 1971 was duly affirmed in appeal by the Appellate

Authority and the revision preferred by the petitioner has also been dismissed by this Court in Civil Revision No. 29/17 and as such, the order of Estate

officer passed on 22.08.2008 has become final and the railway is entitled to take possession of the land in dispute. Petitioner is not entitled to re-open

the issue already settled between the parties by way of this writ petition. As such, I do not find any merit in the writ petition.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s).

From The Blog
Moti Ram Deka & Ors vs General Manager, N.E.F. Railways & Ors (1963)
Oct
19
2025

Landmark Judgements

Moti Ram Deka & Ors vs General Manager, N.E.F. Railways & Ors (1963)
Read More
M/s. Orissa Cement Ltd. & Others vs State of Orissa & Others (1991)
Oct
19
2025

Landmark Judgements

M/s. Orissa Cement Ltd. & Others vs State of Orissa & Others (1991)
Read More