MEHKAR SINGH Vs. VI ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE MEERUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the order dated 18th August 1993, passed by respondent no. 1, releasing the disputed premises in favour of landlord-respondents 3 and 4 and the order of respondent no. 1 dated 18th August, 1993, rejecting the revision preferred by the petitioner against the allotment order in favour of respondent no. 5.

(2.) THE facts in brief are that respondents 3 and 4 are owners and landlords of house no. 450, Begam Bagh, Meerut. THE disputed premises consisting of ground floor and first floor was under the tenancy of one Aman Singh Attray, Advocate, Meerut. Sri Attray had already constructed his own bouse in Saket Meerut. After the construction of the house by him proceedings under section 12 U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) started. Various persons filed allotment applications including Mahendra Singh Tyagi, Advocate, P. N. Sharma and the petitioner. On 16th July 1973 the Rent Central and Eviction Officer declared the house as vacant. On 30th August 1974 he allotted the disputed premises in favour of Sri P. N. Sharma. He, however, after allotment could obtain possession only of first floor of the premises. Sri Mahendra Singh Tyagi filed revision against the said order before the District Judge and his revision was dismissed on 25th July 1976. He filed writ petition No. 1568 of 1976 against the allotment order dated 30th August 1974 and the order passed in revision.,

(3.) RESPONDENTS 3 and 4 filed release application afresh before the Rent Control and Eviction officer on the ground that wife of respondent no 3 requires the disputed premises for establishing a Nursery School. The petitioner filed objection against the said application One Sarju Prasad Tyagi who was Member of Legislative Council, filed application allotment of the disputed accommodation. Oil 6-10-1981, the Rent Control and Eviction Officer rejected the application filed by respondents 3 and 4 for release of the disputed accommodation and on the same day he passed an order of allotment in favour of Sri Sarju Prasad Tyagi. The landlords filed revision against the order rejecting their application for release and the petitioner filed revision against the order allotting the disputed premises in favour of Sri Sarju Prasad Tyagi. Respondeat no. 1 allowed the revision of the landlords by order dated 12th August 1983 and released the disputed accommodation in their favour. The revision filed by the petitioner was dismissed. The petitioner has challenged these orders in this writ petition.