Eviction Requires Alternative Accommodation’ for School: Calcutta High Court

High Court rules that eviction notices to Calcutta Airport English High School must be set aside unless alternative accommodation is provided. In a significant judgment, the Calcutta High Court has set aside the eviction notices issued to Calcutta Airport English High School by the Airport Authority of India (AAI), emphasizing the need for compliance with statutory provisions and the protection of the school’s interests. The judgment, delivered by Justice Suvra Ghosh, directs the AAI to either extend the lease under the original terms or provide alternative accommodation as required by law.

Calcutta Airport English High School, which has been in operation since September 1953, faced eviction notices from the AAI in March and November 2023. The school’s original lease, granted on November 25, 1991, for a period of 30 years at a token license fee of Re. 1 per annum, expired on March 2, 2021. The school sought an extension of the lease, but the AAI demanded a significantly higher rent, leading to legal proceedings.

Lease Extension and Alternative Accommodation:

Justice Suvra Ghosh underscored the importance of the earlier court directives, which stipulated that the school would not be evicted without alternative accommodation. “The authority must either extend the lease at the original terms or provide alternative, equivalent, and convenient accommodation,” the court stated, referring to the deed of lease and previous court orders.

Lease Renewal and Authority’s Discretion:

The court acknowledged that the original lease did not include an automatic renewal clause but highlighted a provision allowing potential extension. The judgment directed the AAI to reconsider the lease extension under the previous terms or proceed with eviction in compliance with the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971.

Eviction Process and Statutory Compliance:

The court emphasized the necessity for any eviction to adhere to statutory requirements, including providing alternative accommodation. The AAI’s demand for increased rent was deemed inconsistent with the original court directive and the terms of the lease deed. “The enhanced lease rent demanded by the authority does not align with the order passed by this Court,” the judgment noted.

Justice Ghosh extensively discussed the legal principles governing the case, particularly the obligations under the Public Premises Act and the Airports Authority of India Act, 1994. The court underscored that the eviction process must ensure that the school’s interests are protected, as mandated by law.

Justice Suvra Ghosh remarked, “In view of the covenant recorded in terms of the order of this Court, since the respondents have decided not to extend the lease any further, they are at liberty to take necessary steps for eviction of the school under the Act of 1971 subject to providing alternative equivalent convenient accommodation to the school near the airport at their cost.”

The Calcutta High Court’s judgment highlights the judiciary’s commitment to ensuring fair treatment in eviction cases involving educational institutions. By setting aside the eviction notices and mandating compliance with statutory provisions, the judgment reinforces the legal framework protecting such institutions. This decision is expected to have a substantial impact on similar cases, emphasizing the necessity of alternative accommodation when eviction is pursued.

Date of Decision: May 16, 2024

Calcutta Airport English High School (H.S.) & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors.