KAPOOR CHAND JAIN (SINCE DECEASED AND SUBSTITUTED BY HIS LEGAL HEIR) Vs. RENT CONTROL AND EVICTION OFFICER, MATHURA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Komal Mehrotra, learned counsel for petitioner and perused the record.

(2.) Petitioner's application has been rejected by Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Mathura (hereinafter referred to as "RCEO") by impugned order dated 26.8.1993 on the ground that though transfer of respondent no. 2 from Mathura took place in 1977, but the petitioner and others miserably failed to prove that respondent no. 2 was ever allotted any official accommodation at the place where he was transferred from time to time and in order to attract Sec. 12 (3-A) of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1972"), both the things are required to be proved, firstly that official concerned has been transferred and secondly that he has been allotted an official accommodation for residence or has occupied any building for his residence, otherwise there is no question of deemed vacancy therein.

(3.) In the present case, RCEO has categorically held that petitioner could not demonstrate that any residential accommodation was allotted to respondent no. 2 at the place where he was transferred and, therefore, Sec. 12 (3- A) of Act, 1972 is not attracted in the case, hence, there is no deemed vacancy in the accommodation in question.