news details |
|
|
| Court directs "ex-ministers" to vacate govt accommodation within 15 days | | | Early Times Report
Jammu, Oct 12: In five different appeals filed by Shabir Ahmed, Aijaz Jan, Yogesh Sawhney and Dr Manohar Lal under section 12 of J&K Public Premises (Eviction of unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1988 against the action of the respondents for evicting the appellants even without declaring them as unauthorized occupant of quarters in Jammu and cancelling his allotment without providing them an opportunity of being heard and subsequently directing their eviction by misinterpreting relevant provisions of the Act, 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu, Bala Joyti today dismissed their appeals and directed them to vacate accommodation within 15 days from this order failing which respondents will be at liberty to initiate any coercive process under law. While dismissing the appeal, the judge observed that the appellant ceases to hold any Public Office. Threat perception, if any, could be connected to his ministerial position and must have faded by now as he is not even an MLA anymore. Threat perception to appellant that is vociferously canvassed in court is now only a misconceived one and cannot be considered by this court for want of any evidence of such threat still prevailing. He must therefore vacate above described house so that the Government agency/respondent is in a position to accommodate present MLAs to whom this accommodation has been allotted commensurate with his status. There is no reasonable and justifiable ground pleaded in memo of appeal or proved to be otherwise. The provisions of the PPA 1988 are meant to strictly deal with unauthorized occupants of government accommodation so much so that even no appeal is permissible in the Act against the judgment passed in appeal and criminal case can be lodged against unauthorised occupant. Section 14 of PPA provides punishment up to 6 months or fine and section 15 of the Act declares offences to be cognizable. This apart S.447- A RPC read with S.441-A RPC takes care of criminal trespass. Obviously, therefore as a corollary of law 'If the provisions of a legislation are stringent, their implementation must be stricter'. With these observations, the court dismissed all the appeals. (JNF) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
