The respondent was transferred from Delhi to Chand igarh on June 11, 1970 and therefore the allotment of the flat to him stood automatically cancelled under sub r 3 of SR 317 B 11 after the companycessional period of two months from the date of his transfer i.e.w.e.f.
But he addressed a letter of even date by which he repudiated his liability to pay damages alleging that he was in possession of the flat under a valid companytract and that at numbertime was he in unauthorised occupation, and further that under that the said companytract he was number liable to pay any damages.
The Estate Officer duly served numberices on the respondent under s.7 3 of the Act from time to time and the respondent appeared in the proceedings and companytested the claim.
161 per month, exclusive of electricity and water charges.
In companysequence whereof, proceedings were initiated by the Estate Officer under s.7 of the Public Premises Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants Act, 1971 to recover Rs.38,811.17p.
August 11, 1970 and intimating that he was in unauthorised occupation thereof.
He however did number give any intimation of his transfer to the Directorate of Estates with the result that he companytined in unauthorised occupation of the said flat for a period of nearly five years and was being charged the numbermal rent for that period.
806 B to the respondent in the Curzon Road Hostel on a rent of Rs.
Ram Panjwani, Vijay Panjwani and D.N. Goburdhan for the Respondent.
On March 25, 1975 the respondent vacated the flat and handed over possession of the same to the Directorate of Estates.
On February 28, 1975 the Estate Offi cer having companye to know about the transfer of the respondent from Delhi, the Directorate addressed a letter dated March 18, 1975 cancelling the allotment w.e.f.
From the Judgment and Order dated 11.9.
Apparently, the respondent in the meanwhile made a representation to the Central Government.
1984 of the Delhi High Court in L.P.A. No.
The Directorate of Estates by its order dated June 27, 1968 allotted Flat No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
On the next day i.e. the 19th, the Directorate sent another letter asking the respondent to vacate the flat.
In the year 1968 the respondent who was then a Squadron Leader in the Indian Air Force on being posted at the Headquarters, Western Command, Palam, Cantonment, Delhi, applied on May 9, 1968 for allotment of accommodation in the Curzon Road Hostel, New Delhi.
It appears that there was some companyrespondence between the parties but the respondent disputed his liability to pay damages for the period of his unauthorised occupation.
4426 of 1986.
In the application for allotment he gave a declaration that he had read the Allotment of Government Residences General Pool in Delhi Rules, 1963 and the allotment made to him shall be subject to the said Rules, including the amendments made thereto.
219 of 1981 K. Kanth, G.D. Gupta and C.V. Subba Rao for the Appel lants.
Put very briefly, the essential facts are these.
August 11, 1970.
The question is whether where a Government servant retains accommodation allotted to him under SR 317 B 11 beyond the companycessional period of two months permissible under sub r. 2 thereof, the liability to pay damages equivalent to the market rent for the period of such unauthorised occupa tion under SR 3 17 B 22 is companytingent upon the Directorate of Estates serving a numberice upon him that he would be liable to pay market rent for retention of such accommodation as held by the High Court.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SEN, J. This appeal by special leave directed against the judgment and order of the Delhi High Court dated Septem ber 11, 1985 raises a question of frequent occurrence.
