Tarun Agarwala, J.@mdashHeard Shri Jitendra Chaudhary, the learned Counsel for the petitioners and Shri P.C. Bist, the learned Brief Holder for the opposite parties.
2. The petitioner is a society and is the landlord of the premises in question. The petitioner filed a suit for the eviction of Ms. Sarla Raman in the year 2003 which was decreed and, eventually, the decree of eviction was affirmed by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court directed the tenant to hand over the vacant possession to the landlord by 19th July, 2010.
3. Before the said date, it transpires that the registration of the petitioner-society was cancelled by the Sub-Registrar vide order dated 24th April, 2010 against which the petitioner preferred an appeal, in which, an interim order has been passed staying the cancellation of the registration of the society. Subsequently, the District Education Officer issued an order dated 15th July, 2010 appointing the Block Education Officer as the authorized controller.
4. In the light of the aforesaid, the District Judge by an order dated 16th July, 2010 directed the tenant to hand over the keys to the District Education Officer, Dehradun. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the aforesaid, has filed the present writ petition.
5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order of the District Education Officer dated 15th July, 2010 has been challenged by the petitioner in writ petition No. 1270 of 2010 which has been admitted and the order dated 15th July, 2010 passed by the District Education Officer has been stayed. In view of the aforesaid, there is no occasion for the keys of the premises to remain in possession of the District Education Officer.
6. This Court by an order dated 6th September, 2010 had directed the Standing Counsel to produce the keys of the premises and file an affidavit in response, if required to the writ petition. The learned Brief Holder states that the respondents have no problem if the keys are handed over to the petitioner concerned.
7. This Court finds that the fact that the registration of the society has been cancelled or an authorized controller has been appointed does not mean that the society has become defunct and, therefore, keys of the premises of which the ownership is of the society should be given to the District Education Officer. In any case, all these orders passed by the authority have been stayed and the petitioner is in effective control of the management of the society.
8. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned order dated 16th July, 2010 cannot be sustained and is quashed. The writ petition is allowed. Shri P.C. Bist, the learned Brief Holder for the opposite parties who has produced the keys of the premises in question is directed to hand over the keys to Shri Jitendra Chaudhary, the learned Counsel for the petitioner today who in turn will hand it over to the petitioner concerned.
