USHA SHARMA Vs. PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY/CIVIL JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of this writ petition, moved under Article 226 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner/ landlord has sought writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 4.4.2005, passed by respondent No. 1 in Rent Control Case No. 3 of 2004, whereby the prescribed authority has stayed the proceedings under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972, resorting to Section 10 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case, as narrated in the writ petition are that, the petitioner is owner and landlord of the shop in question, who filed an application (copy Annexure -2 to the writ petition) under Section 21 U) (a) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 for release of the shop. It appears that earlier proceedings under Section 12 of the aforesaid Act were initiated before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer on the ground that the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 have sublet the shop to the defendant Nos. 3 to 8. However, vide order dated 3.11.1999 (copy Annexure -4 to the writ petition), passed in Revision No. 3 of 1998, the revisional court remanded the matter to the Rent Control and Eviction Officer. But, both the parties filed writ petitions against said order passed by the revisional court, which are pending before this Court in the form of Writ Petition No. 3693 (M/S) of 2001 and Writ Petition No. 454 (M/S) of 2002. Now, the defendant Nos. 1 to 8 (present respondent Nos. 2 to 9) filed objection before the prescribed authority stating that since question of sub -tenancy is sub -judice before the High Court, as such, the proceedings under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 should be stayed. The petitioner (landlord) alleges that the scope of present application under Section 21 is different than that of the proceedings under Section 12 of the aforesaid Act. Therefore, the petitioner has sought quashing of the impugned order, whereby proceedings under Section 21 have been stayed.

(3.) I heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the affidavits along with annexures filed, by the parties.