JAUHARI DUTT Vs. ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE DEHRADUN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is directed against the order passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer rejecting the application of the petitioner seeking re-allotment of the premises in dispute in his favour as contemplated under rule 10 (6) Proviso) (b) of the Rules framed under the U. P. Urban Building (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction), Act, 1972 U. P. Act no. 13 of 1972 which order was affirmed in revision by the respondent no. 1.

(2.) FEELING aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, the petitioner has approached this Court for redress seeking the quashing thereof.

(3.) THE order rejecting the application for re-allotment was challenged by the petitioner before the revising authority respondent no. 1 without any success. THE respondent no. 1 under his order dated 8-5-86 affirmed the order passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer on the ground that it had been clearly observed therein that the accommodation available in the house built by Jauhari Dutt was sufficient. THE revisional court was of the view that the question as to whether the accommodation available in the house constructed by the petitioner was sufficient for his family was a question of fact and since the newly built house had more accommodation than the portion which was in the tenancy of the petitioner where the entire family had been living before the construction of new bouse, there was no justification for interfering with the order passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer. THE revisional court, however, observed that no doubt the order passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer was brief sand the evidence had not been discussed in detail but the order was supported by the evidence on record and could not be said to be pervese or against law.