Delhi District Court
Dr Archana Sharma @ Archana Sharma vs Direcotor Of Estates-1 on 5 October, 2023
IN THE COURT OF MR. SANJAY GARG-I
PRINCIPAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE,
NEW DELHI DISTRICT
PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI
PPA No.20/2022
CNR No. DLND010080382022
Dr. Archana Sharma @ Archana Shaarma
D/o Sh. I.P. Sharma
R/o Flat No. D1/013
Satya Marg, Chanakayapuri
New Delhi110021. ......Appellant
Versus
1. Director of Estates
Directorate of Estates, Govt. of India
CWing, Nirman Bhawan
New Delhi.
2. Estate Officer
Directorate of Estates, Govt. of India
Nirman Bhawan, Maulana Azad Road
New Delhi110018. ...... Respondents
Date of institution of appeal : 20.09.2022
Date of addressing arguments : 29.08.2023
Date of Judgment : 05.10.2023
Appearances:
Appellant in person.
Sh. Vikesh Sharma, Ld. Counsel for the respondents.
JUDGMENT:
1. The order impugned vide this appeal is dated 07.09.2022 of Estate Officer vide which appellant being allottee and in occupation of the premises i.e. Qtr. No. 13, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi was directed to vacate the same with immediate PPA20/2022 Dr. Archana Sharma v Directorate of Estate & ors Page no. 1/7 effect.
BRIEF FACTS
2. The brief facts of the case as enumerated by the appellant in this appeal are that she is the Principal Scientist under CSIR and is a bona fide allottee of the suit premises i.e. House no. DI/13, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi. The respondent no. 2 has cancelled the allotment of this house w.e.f. 01.11.2017. On 06.12.2019, she has requested to Sh. B.L. Gupta, Asst. Director of Estate (Accounts) to get her license fee updated and he has sent her response on 01.11.2019. The then DG, CSIR Dr. Girish Sahni was highly prejudiced against her and he has illegally and in utter violation of orders of GB, the highest decision making body of CSIR and latest order of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has transferred her from the post of HOD, CSIRTKDL Unit to another CSIR Institute. Against this order she has filed an OA before the CAT and her transfer was stayed for non compliance of the order and the CAT has issued notice to DG CSIR. Due to this reason vindictively DG CSIR illegally stopped her pay w.e.f. 01.11.2017. In this regard, she has already submitted her detailed reply to Ms. Ritu Sain, Director, DOE. She had filed detailed reply dated 03.02.2020 and 16.09.2020 to the notice issued by respondent no. 2 under Section 3B of the Public Premises Act. Vide this notice respondent no. 2 had illegally cancelled the accommodation on account of non payment of license fee by CSIR administration due to personal prejudice of few individuals. She had further made representation on 22.02.2021 PPA20/2022 Dr. Archana Sharma v Directorate of Estate & ors Page no. 2/7 and reminder in this regard dated 07.09.2021 to respondent no.1 with request to withdraw the notice under Section 3B of Public Premises Act.
3. During all this, she attained superannuation on 31.07.2022. Her pension work is pending as well as she was waiting for the fixation of hearing of her case by respondent no.2. But without giving her any personal hearing and without deciding her representation she received letter dated 07.09.2022 vide which impugned order was passed directing her to vacate the said premises.
GROUNDS OF CHALLENGE
4. The impugned order has been assailed on various grounds. The main ground raised by appellant is that the said official has not considered her reply and has passed impugned order without consideration of material available on record and no hearing was given to her before passing the impugned order. The impugned order is perverse in law and the Estate Officer has not considered the settled principle of law.
5. The respondent has not filed any reply but has opposed the appeal vehemently. It is pertinent to mention here that during the course of arguments on 21.09.2022, Ld. Counsel for appellant has conceded that the appellant has retired on 31.07.2022 on attaining superannuation. Ld. Counsel for appellant has urged that eviction order dated 07.09.2022 has been applied retrospectively w.e.f 01.11.2017 wherein the PPA20/2022 Dr. Archana Sharma v Directorate of Estate & ors Page no. 3/7 appellant is in active service of the department at that time and even vide letter dated 01.12.2019, she has been directed to pay licensee fee.
6. On 06.12.2022, Ld. Counsel for appellant has conceded that she has been compulsorily retired from service on 04.02.2022. On 04.07.2022, Ld. Counsel for appellant has stated that she has been terminated from the services w.e.f. 04.02.2022. On 28.08.2023, Sh. S.N. Pandey, Ld. Counsel for appellant had made a statement that he wants to give an undertaking on behalf of appellant that she will vacate the House no. DI/13, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi by 20.09.2023 and handover the possession to the CPWD and appellant has further undertaken to clear all the arrears as per rules. Ld. Counsel for appellant has sought an adjournment to file vakalatnama on 29.08.2023 but no one appeared on the date fixed.
7. As none appeared for the appellant, the arguments advanced by Ld. Counsel for respondent was considered. He also filed written submissions. Perused the relevant record of this file as well as the record of Estate Officer.
8. Ld. Counsel for respondent has submitted that House no. DI/13, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi was allotted to the appellant and same was cancelled on the ground of non receipt of licensee fee w.e.f. 01.11.2017. The Director of Estate had received intimation from CSIR stating that disciplinary authority has imposed penalty of removing of service upon appellant and vide letter dated 23.03.2023 the said official was requested to PPA20/2022 Dr. Archana Sharma v Directorate of Estate & ors Page no. 4/7 issue eviction order at the earliest. The said official issued eviction letter vide impugned order dated 07.09.2022 against which appellant has taken stay on false and fabricated facts by concealing the actual facts.
ANALYSIS
9. As per the impugned order, the Estate Officer has acted under Section 3B of the Public Premises Act. For better appreciation of the facts, Section 3B is reproduced as follows:
"3B Eviction from residential accommodation(1) notwithstanding anything contained in section 4 or section 5, if the estate officer has information that any person, who was granted residential accommodation occupation, is in unauthorized occupation of the said residential accommodation, he shall
(a) forthwith issue notice in writing calling upon such person to show cause within a period of three working days why an order of eviction should not be made;
(b) cause the notice to be served by having it affixed on the outer door or some other conspicuous part of the said residential accommodation, and in such other manner be prescribed, whereupon the notice shall be deemed to have been served upon such person. "(2) The estate officer shall, after considering the cause, if any, shown by the person on whom the notice is served under sub-section (1) and after making such inquiry as it deems expedient in the circumstances of the case, for reasons to be recorded in writing, make an order of eviction of such person.
(3) If the person in unauthorised occupation refuses or fails to comply with the order of eviction referred to in sub-section (2), the estate officer may evict such person from the residential accommodation and take possession thereof and may, for that purpose, use such force as may be necessary."
10. As gathered from the pleadings of the appellant and various grounds raised by the appellant, the main grievance of the appellant appears to be that despite the stay from CAT on her PPA20/2022 Dr. Archana Sharma v Directorate of Estate & ors Page no. 5/7 transfer, she was transferred and she had filed contempt petition against her Department i.e. CSIR. It is further urged that thereafter on account of non payment of licensee fee for the residential accommodation allotted to her, the allotment was cancelled and Estate Officer was asked to get the same vacated. It has been stated that appellant has given various representation to her superior officers against illegal action but the same were not considered.
11. As per the respondent, appellant has been compulsorily retired from services but as per the appellant she has attained superannuation on 31.07.2022.
12. As already mentioned, Ld. Counsel for appellant has conceded that she has been compulsorily retired from services on 04.02.2022. Whereas the court has specifically observed in order dated 06.12.2022 that this fact has been concealed in the entire appeal and an attempt has been made to plead that the appellant retired from her services on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.07.2022.
13. It is relevant to mention here that the appeal was filed on 20.09.2022 and the fact of appellant being compulsorily retired from service w.e.f. 04.02.2022 was well within the knowledge of appellant but there is no mention of this fact in the entire body of the appeal.
14. Having retired from service on 04.02.2022, what is the right left with the appellant to continue in occupation of this premises, has nowhere being deliberated. If the compulsory PPA20/2022 Dr. Archana Sharma v Directorate of Estate & ors Page no. 6/7 superannuation w.e.f 04.02.2022 has been set aside by any forum, again there is no whisper from the appellant on this issue. After attaining superannuation, depending upon the rules and regulations, the allottee is required to vacate the government accommodation. On what basis appellant now wants to continue to retain this government accommodation by seeking setting aside the impugned order? Moreover, as already discussed on 28.08.2023, appellant through her counsel had given an undertaking to this court to vacate the house by 20.09.2023 but thereafter no one had appeared before this court on behalf of appellant.
DECISION:
15. Having received the information from CSIR regarding superannuation of the appellant, the notice and the other follow up proceedings initiated by respondent no. 2 against the appellant are fully justified. There is no illegality in the impugned order. In view of the aforesaid reasons, this appeal is found without merit and same is thereby dismissed.
Record of Estate Officer be returned along with copy of this order and file be consigned to record room.
Digitally signedSANJAY by SANJAY GARG - I GARG - Date:
I 2023.10.05
16:15:34 +0530
Announced in the open Court (SANJAY GARGI)
th
on 5 October, 2023 Principal District & Sessions Judge
New Delhi District
Patiala House Courts, New Delhi
PPA20/2022 Dr. Archana Sharma v Directorate of Estate & ors Page no. 7/7
PPA20/2022 Dr. Archana Sharma v Directorate of Estate & ors Page no. 8/7