HC reserves order on Raja?s tenants? plea | india | Hindustan Times
Today in New Delhi, India
Feb 26, 2017-Sunday
New Delhi
  • Humidity
  • Wind

HC reserves order on Raja?s tenants? plea

india Updated: Aug 20, 2006 00:36 IST

LUCKNOW BENCH of the high court comprising Justices Pradeep Kant and BB Agarwal in the State capital on Saturday reserved its orders on the four writ petitions filed earlier by four occupants of Raja Mehmudabad’s properties in Hazratganj area here on Saturday.

The petitioners had challenged the SDM’s order calling upon them to vacate the premises under their occupation on the ground that the order in question was not applicable on them. The petitioners’ contention is that since the premises from which they were carrying out their business was rented out to them since before 1965 by the father of the present scion of Mehmudabad Mohd Amir Mohd Khan, the Supreme Court’s order did not apply to them.

According to sources, the tenants have already consulted some top lawyers on the issue in New Delhi and would move the apex court after Tuesday’s outcome in the matter.

It is pertinent to mention that the Raja’s properties were declared as Enemy Property after 1965. 

“The question of pre or post-1965 vesting of the property does not arise. We have clear-cut instructions from the Custodian of Enemy Property in Mumbai in this connection. Barring those recognised by the Raja, all other tenants are to be evicted,” said SDM (Sadar) Manoj Rai, the managing officer of enemy properties.

The petitioners’ argument is that since they were the original tenants of the Raja of Mehmudabad himself, they were in effect “recognised by the Raja.”

The administration authorities, however, said they would go strictly by the book and all 57 tenants would be evicted after August 25, the deadline given to the occupants to vacate. “If the tenants have any grievances, the only other legal remedy available to them is the Supreme Court,” emphasised the SDM.

He said the apex court had given four week’s time to ensure compliance of its order, the deadline for which was August 31.