ANAND BALLABH Vs. MOHD. IQBAL AND 17 ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Rahul Sahai, learned counsel for the petitioner.

(2.) Through this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 6.11.2014 passed by the Prescribed Authority/IV Civil Judge (Senior Division) Mathur in P.A. Case No. 45 of 2002 (Gul Mohammad Vs. Krishna Kumar) as well as the orders dated 29.11.2012 and 17.7.2013 passed by the same authority in so far as the Prescribed Authority has not allowed the 103 Ga application. It has further been prayed for issuing a direction to allow the petitioner's 106 Ga application dated 1.4.2014.

(3.) The facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the respondent landlord has filed an application under Sec. under Sec. 21(1)(a)(b) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in P.A. Case No. 45 of 2002 (Gul Mohammad Vs. Krishna Kumar and others ) for release of the accommodation in dispute. When the application was filed the original tenant late Shambhu Nath had died and his heirs were made party including one late Usha Devi, daughter of late Shambhu Nath. Late Usha Devi did not file any objection/written statement to the release application but the other joint tenants had filed objection to the release application. Late Usha Devi had died on 17.7.2012. The landlord instead of filing an application for substituting the heirs of Late Usha Devi had made an application for mentioning 'since deceased' before the name of late Usha Devi. In due course, it appears an order was passed on 1.9.2012 by the learned Prescribed Authority to close the opportunity to lead the evidence and vide order dated 29.11.2012 he has allowed the application of the landlord to mention 'since deceased' before the name of late Usha Devi.