Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971: s.3(b) – Public Premises situated at Akola – Notice issued under the Act to attend proceedings at Mumbai – Whether the proceedings in relation to such public premises can be initiated under the Act at Mumbai or it has to be initiated at Akola – Held: The Estate Officer has to exercise its jurisdiction in relation to the public premises falling in the local limits in the notification – In the instant case, the proceedings in relation to such public premises could only be initiated at Akola, that being the area falling in the local limits specified in the notification for exercise of powers by Estate Officer.
Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD: Construing the expression “local limits within which” occurring in Section 3(b) of the Act, the High Court rightly held that the Estate Officer has to exercise its jurisdiction in relation to the public premises falling in the local limits specified in the notification. Since in this case, the notification in clear terms, specified that the Mill is situated at Akola, a fortiori, the proceedings in relation to such public premises under the Act could only be initiated at Akola-that being the area falling in the local limits specified in the notification for exercise of powers by the Estate Officer. The High Court was, therefore, right in interpreting Section 3(b) of the Act and, in consequence, was legally justified in quashing the notices impugned in the writ petition as being without jurisdiction. [Paras 15, 16] [932-E-G]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.