STATE TIMES NEWS
JAMMU: The High Court of J&K and Ladakh has quashed and set aside the impugned order/judgment dated October 10.2013 passed by the court of Principal District Judge, Jammu in file No. 28/Misc. The respondent a retired employee has been directed to vacate the government quarter No. 13-F Company Bagh and to pay rent for the premises under his unauthorized occupation with effect from April 1 2011 till the date of vacation of premises at the rate of Rs. 2,500 per month as per government order No. 210 EST of 2000 dated August 22, 2000 strictly in conformity with the order passed by this Court in OWP No. 345/2012.
Giving the judgment, Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal in case titled Director Estates and Deputy Director Estates versus Avtar Krishan, son of Niranjan Nath Bhat, resident of Q. No. 13-F Company Bagh, Jammu and Rayees Mairaj, Computer Assistant, Personal Section, Chief Minister, observed that the right of the respondent no. 1 to enjoy the Govt. accommodation ceased with his retirement from service and, therefore, he does not possess any right to keep govt. accommodation with him for all times to come and even after his retirement, when under rules he can retain govt. accommodation only for a period of one month after his retirement and thereafter, the accommodation is deemed to have been cancelled. Having lost his right to enjoy Govt. accommodation with his retirement from service, the respondent No. 1 cannot question the Deputy Director’s communication to deposit the rent which is strictly in conformity with the directions passed by this court in OWP no. 345/2012 and the order passed by the appellate court quashing the same cannot sustain the test of law and is liable to be quashed. The directions passed by the appellate court restraining the petitioners herein from evicting the respondent no. 1 from Govt. accommodation is also in flagrant violation of the Act of 1988 and cannot sustain the test of law and is liable to be set aside.
The High Court further observed that since the respondent No. 1 has remained in an unauthorized occupation of the premises for more than a decade, he is, therefore, disentitled to perpetuate his illegal occupation of the Govt. quarter any further on the strength of order passed by appellate authority. The respondent No. 1 does not possess any enforceable right in respect of the quarter nor would it be in the interest of justice to permit the perpetuation of his unauthorised occupation.
The facts of the instant writ petition are that the respondent No. 1 was a Government employee and was allotted Government Quarter No. 13-F Company Bagh vide Order No. 33-DE of 2004 dated Januaryb 19, 2004 for a period upto end of April 2004. The respondent No. 1 continued to be permitted to retain the aforesaid accommodation till he retired in Feb. 2011. The respondent after his retirement did not vacate the Quarter as such a notice under Section 4(1) of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1988 (for short “Act of 1988?) was issued to him vide No. DDE/J/73 dated March 06, 2012.