OM PRAKASH TIWARI Vs. SEFALI CHATTERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 16.3.2013 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, Varanasi by which the revision filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. The brief facts of the case are that in respect of shop situated in premises No. B8/98 Bada Gambhir Singh, Police Station Bhelupur, Varanasi, which is owned by Smt. Shefali Chatterji, wife of late Kartik Kumar Chatterji, filed an application under Section 12 read with Section 16(1)(b) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1972") for release of shop in question alleging that the said shop was let out to the petitioner only for 11 months and after expiry of said period in August, 1991 he ceased to be a legal occupant thereof and, therefore, is liable to be ejected. Since Smt. Shefali Chatterji needs the accommodation in question for setting her daughter-in-law by commencing a business by converting some part of house in question in commercial accommodation, therefore, it should be released in her favour.

(2.) The application was registered as Case No. 84 of 1991. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer/Additional District Magistrate (Civil Supply), Varanasi (hereinafter referred to as the "RCEO") declared accommodation in question vacant by its order dated 28.5.1994 and directed for notification of vacancy for further proceedings for allotment. Subsequently, vide order dated 11.4.1996 the petitioner's application for release of accommodation in question was allowed and it was released in her favour by RCEO.

(3.) The petitioner took up the matter in Rent Revision No. 196 of 1996 whereupon the Additional District Judge has decided the revision vide judgment dated 30.7.2003 setting aside RCEO's order of release and allowed the revision. The Revisional Court held that once the accommodation has been let out by a landlord illegally without any letter of allotment and in violation of statutory provisions of Act, 1972, such a landlord would not be entitled for release of accommodation under Section 16 of the Act, 1972. The said revisional order has been challenged by the respondent in Writ Petition No. 47752 of 2003, Smt. Shefali Chaterji v. Additional District Judge, Varanasi and others. The writ Court vide order dated 5.9.2012 allowed the writ petition and remanded back the matter to the revisional Court to decide the revision in accordance to law. The revisional Court while setting aside and remanding back the matter has relied upon the decision of the Division Bench dated 5.2.2008 passed in Writ Petition No. 37767 of 2003, Ajay Pal Singh v. District Judge, Meerut and others, wherein it has been held that the landlord is not deprived of his legal right to make a release application in respect of a building, which had been earlier given in possession, by him, to an authorised occupant in violation of the provisions of Act No. 13 of 1972; the release application made by the landlord cannot be ignored nor the order passed thereon can be termed to be void or of no effect; the High Court in exercise of powers under Section 226 of the Constitution of India need not declare the order made in favour of such a landlord as void.