An intellectually disabled Tasmanian man facing eviction from a Housing Tasmania unit is at the centre of what has been dubbed a test case for public housing in the state.

Disability pensioner Gregory William Parsons, 53, has been living in a Housing Tasmania unit in Glenorchy, in Hobart's northern suburbs for 10 years.

He was told in May to vacate the property after his lease expired.

That was despite his lease being extended 13 times in the last decade for periods of three, six and 12 months.

Mr Parsons claimed he had never fallen behind in rent, nor breached his lease agreement in any way.

He said he was surprised and bewildered when he received the letter from Housing Tasmania which told him his tenancy agreement was due to expire and he needed to vacate the property.

"I don't know what to do next. I asked them [why], still no answers," he said.

Mr Parsons said his home was his sanctuary.

"I just close the door, stay in here, and let the world go by out there," he said.

"I like to have my own space, my own home. That is why (I'm) fighting it. Somebody has to do something, so I have to stand up for what is right."

Mr Parsons' lawyers are appealing a Magistrate's decision to order him to vacate the property.

The Supreme Court heard had Mr Parsons left the house he would have been made homeless and placed at the end of the housing queue.

Melbourne QC Ron Merkel told the court a different standard applied to Housing Tasmania than to private rentals, and the court had to be satisfied the eviction was genuine or in accordance with the terms of the Residential Tenancy Act.

Expired lease not a 'genuine' reason to evict

Housing Tasmania argued lease expiration was a genuine reason, while Mr Parsons' lawyers argued it was not, because Housing Tasmania's objective was to house some of the state's most vulnerable.

Lawyer Ben Bartl says Mr Parsons was not behind in his rent and in his view was not in breach of his lease. ( ABC News )

Solicitor Ben Bartl said his client could not afford private accommodation.

"He needs to live in public housing and we say that Housing Tasmania have a duty to provide accommodation for such people," he said.

"We don't believe the reason provided by Housing was genuine or just."

Mr Bartl said Housing Tasmania was a statutory body which was obligated to provide safe and secure accommodation to its tenants.

"There are 3,000 people on the waiting list and by choosing to evict tenants on the basis of lease expiration the tenant has no ability to challenge that before the courts," he said.

"The tenant in this case had lived in his Housing Tasmania property for 10 years, he wasn't behind in his rent, and in our view he wasn't in breach of his lease agreement.

"What we would say to Housing Tasmania is 'in future please let the tenant know why they're being evicted so they have an opportunity to challenge that before the courts'.

"There needs to be more accommodation made available to people in our client's position and Housing needs to look at its policies and procedures to ensure that all of its tenants are provided with reasons and a right of review."

In a statement, the Government said it could not comment on individual cases before court but evictions were a last resort.

However, a spokeswoman said of 29 evictions by Housing Tasmania since 2014, 18 were related to rent arrears and 11 related to property condition.

With Justice Gregory Geason reserving his decision, Mr Parsons said he was hopeful he would be able to stay in his home until Christmas.