CHANDRA METAL COMPANY Vs. AVTAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners with the prayer to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 18.03.2010, passed by Additional District Magistrate (Trans Gomti)/Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Lucknow, declaring vacancy of the shop in tenancy of the petitioners and also for quashing the order dated 04.05.2011 passed by the In-charge District Judge, Lucknow dismissing the revision filed by the petitioners against the aforesaid order, which are contained as Annexure Nos. 1 and 3 to the writ petition.

(2.) THE brief facts of the present case are that the landlords moved an application before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer under Section 16(1)(b) of the U.P. Act No.13 of 1972 on 13.05.1988 to the effect that tenancy has arisen with regard to four shops situated in House No.27, Gautam Budh Marg, police staton Aminabad, Lucknow and release of the tenanted premises thereof, which was registered as case no.1 of 2010. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer released the said premises after declaring the vacancy in favour of the landlords.

(3.) THE legal position is that when any tenancy is reported or is brought to the knowledge of the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, he may, after holding an enquiry, declare vacancy and then shall proceed on to decide the application for release moved by the landlords, if any, or allot the premises. The prospective allottee cannot file the revision against the order declaring vacancy, but he has an option to prefer writ petition before this Court, if he so chooses. But if the release application is allowed, the prospective allottee may prefer a revision before the District Judge. In case, the release application is rejected, the landlords shall be competent to prefer a revision before the District Judge.