Case Title: Alok Awasthi v. Additional District Judge-4 Lucknow and Another.
Decided on October 13, 2023.
Case No.: WRIT-CNo-1000861 of 2014.
CORUM: HON’BLE JUSTICE. PANKAJ BHATIA.
Introduction
In the present petition filed by the petitioner, the petitioner stated that he is a senior journalist and accredited with one company known as CBV News Service. He had allotted residential accommodation which was cancelled later on the ground that he had transferred from Lucknow. On observing the facts of the present case the Hon’ble High Court held that the petitioner has no right to stay in the premises and given the four months duration to vacate the premises also pay the outstanding rent if there is any due. Also took the Suo Moto cognizance upon the AHUCED Act, under which to allot the government premises to the persons who do not hold any post in the Government which is contrary to Article 14 of the constitution.
Facts of the case
The petitioner, a journalist had been allotted government premises for residential accommodation, later on, his accommodation was canceled on the ground that he had been transferred out of Lucknow. In December 2012, notice was served to the petitioner to vacate the premises. The petitioner did not vacate the premises, a letter was sent to the District Magistrate in January 2014, to vacate the premises. The petitioner himself was given the undertaking to vacate the house on January 21, 2014.
Court’s observation
The Hon’ble High Court observed that the petitioner is residing in the premises despite giving the undertaking in the year 2014. However, the petitioner has no right to stay on the impugned premises because there is no allotment had been made in favor of the petitioner after the 2016 Act came into force. The Hon’ble Court held that the petitioner is liable to vacate the premises and given four months duration for that and also ordered that the petitioner has to pay outstanding rent if there is any due. The Hon’ble High Court also relied on the judgments given by the Apex Court in the cases, Lok Prahari (I) v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others;(2016), Lok Prahari (II) v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others;(2018), and Union of India and Another v. Onkar Nath Dhar; (2021). The Hon’ble High Court held that on the above judgment of the Apex court, the Government accommodation could not have been allotted to a person who had demitted his office. No exception was carved for the person who was once a parliamentarian. It was held that the government premises are only for the people in service and not for the retiree, and not for those who had demitted their offices.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best family law firm, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm. Best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by: Aamir Hussain.
click here to view/read judgement.
