ABDUL RAHIM KHAN @ MUNNAN @ ANJUM (NOW DECEASED AND SUBSTITUTED BY HIS LEGAL HEIR) Vs. VI ADDL. D.J. & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Called in revised. None appeared on behalf of petitioner to press this writ petition. However, I have perused the record.

(2.) Writ petition is directed against the judgment dated 3.11.1999 passed by 6th Addl. District Judge, Jhansi. The appellate Court by means of impugned judgment has allowed the Rent Appeal No. 12 of 1997 and set aside Prescribed Authority's order dated 28.3.1997 as a result whereof petitioner-landlord's application under Sec. 21 (1) (a) of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 1972') stood dismissed. The dispute relates to residential House No. 40 (new no. 114) situated in Mohall Azadganj, Sipri Bazar, Jhansi,

(3.) Having gone through the impugned order as also pleadings and grounds taken in writ petition, I do not find any patent illegality or irregularity in the order impugned in this writ petition warranting interference. Findings of fact have been recorded which have not been shown perverse or contrary to material on record. I, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere. The scope of judicial review under Art. 227 is very limited and narrow as discussed in detail by this Court in Writ-A No. 11365 of 1998 (Jalil Ahmad Vs. 16th Addl. Distt. Judge, Kanpur Nagar and others) decided on 30.7.2012. There is nothing which may justify judicial review of order impugned in this writ petition in the light of exposition of law, as discussed in the above judgment.