9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Unauthorized occupation of government accommodation by members of the Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary. 2. Effectiveness of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971. 3. Suggestions and guidelines for dealing with unauthorized occupation. Summary: 1. Unauthorized occupation of government accommodation by members of the Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary: The case concerns the prolonged unauthorized occupation of government accommodation by members of the Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary beyond their allotted period. This unauthorized occupation hinders the accommodation of other eligible individuals, causing a significant administrative challenge for the government. 2. Effectiveness of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971: Despite the existence of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, it has not been effective in ensuring timely eviction. The process involves the Estate Officer initiating proceedings, followed by a statutory appeal to the District Judge u/s 9 of the Act, and often subsequent writ proceedings, allowing affluent occupants to continue unauthorized occupation by paying penal/market rent. 3. Suggestions and guidelines for dealing with unauthorized occupation: The Court appointed amicus curiae to assist in framing workable guidelines. The amicus curiae suggested several measures, including: - Taking an undertaking from allottees to vacate within the prescribed period. - Recovering arrears of rent as arrears of land revenue. - Declaring the proviso to Section 11(1) of the Act ultra vires. - Immediate suspension of employees continuing unauthorized occupation. - Intimating unauthorized retention by Ministers and MPs to the Speaker/Chairman for action. - Cancelling discretionary allotments to non-government categories. - Retrieving government houses turned into memorials and banning future memorials. Court's Decision: The Court considered the responses from Union of India, States, and Union Territories, noting that existing provisions suffice but are often circumvented. The Court emphasized the need for additional guidelines and issued several directives, including: - Sending advance notices to retirees to vacate premises. - Making departments liable for follow-up actions. - Expediting eviction proceedings and limiting extensions. - Recovering arrears as land revenue and imposing compound interest. - Informing the Speaker/Chairman of unauthorized retention by MPs and Ministers for action. - Ensuring judges vacate official residences within one month of retirement. The Court highlighted the need for self-realization among unauthorized occupants and disposed of the matter with the outlined terms, emphasizing the correlation between rights and duties.
|
