The Jammu and Kashmir High Court on Friday awarded Rs 10 lakh in compensation to a person who was evicted from his shop-cum residential premise in 1998 by the Badamibagh Cantonment Board without following the due course of law as prescribed by the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971, Live Law reported.
Justice Sanjay Dhar granted the compensation while hearing a petition in which the petitioner sought a declaration that his eviction from the shop-cum-residential premises at Saddar Bazar, Badami Bagh Cantonment, Srinagar was illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of constitutional guarantees.
The compensation was granted by Justice Sanjay Dhar while hearing a petition in which the petitioner sought a declaration that his eviction from the shop-cum-residential premises at Saddar Bazar, Badami Bagh Cantonment, Srinagar was illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of constitutional guarantees.
Subsequently, in the wee hours of 26.12.1998, the Cantonment Board Engineer and Commanding Officer 13 Garhwal Rifles acted under the direction of Brigadier and Cant. Executive Officer allegedly trespassed in the premises, according to the petition.
The petitioner and his family members were dragged out from the allotted premises and the authorities allegedly plundered all the belongings and valuable articles of the petitioner and his family without observing the due course of law, the court was told.
Contesting the plea, Adv Shahbaz Sikander Mir for the Cantonment Board denied that the petitioner was in occupation of the premises for five decades and submitted that the license to conduct the business in the allotted shop 2/11/23, 1:43 PM 24 Years After Forced Eviction By MoD’s Badami Bagh Cantonment Board was granted in favour of the petitioner only for one year and it was renewed a number to times for short periods by the competent authority.
It was averred that the petitioner did not apply for renewal of his license beyond 31.03.1998 and as such, the Board did not consider its renewal.
It was also denied that they had forcibly taken over the premises of the petitioner and claimed that the possession of the premises was taken over by the respondent without the use of force after duly serving notice under rules upon the petitioner.
The court observed that up till March 1998, the possession of the petitioner over the premises in question was legal in nature and once the licence was not renewed, his status became that of an unauthorized occupant. However, for eviction of an unauthorized occupant from public premises, a detailed procedure has been prescribed in the provision contained in the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971.