BANSI LAL Vs. IVTH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE SAHARANPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has claimed to be the tenant of the accommodation in dispute, a shop, has challenged the order dated 24-12-1993 passed by IVth Addl. District Judge,, Saharanpur is rent control revision No. 45/90 Prem Prakash v. Bansi Lal and others whereby he allowed the revision application and quashed the order dated 1-3-1990 passed by the learned prescribed authority and also declared that the revisionist, the landlord was entitled to get possession of the property under consideration.

(2.) THERE has been long standing litigation between the parties regarding the said shop and, thereafter, fresh agreement of tenancy in the year 1988 allegedly had come into existence in between the tenant and the landlord. The rent control and eviction officer admittedly had not allotted the shop under consideration in favour of petitioner, Prem Prakash.

(3.) THE contention of the petitioner that he had become tenant of the shop in dispute by means of the subsequent letting evidently was incorrect. As discussed above, in the absence of the allotment order from the competant authority, the possession of the petitioner was nothing more than that of a licence whose licence had been revoked and he thus had become a trespasser. Learned counsel for the petitioner himself relied upon Full Bench decision of this Court, Nootan Kumar v. IInd Addl District Judge, Banda, ARC 1993 (2) 204 in which it was held that no valid order of tenancy, in the absence of allotment order, could be passed under the provisions of the Act, 13 of 1972. THE possession of the petitioner, therefore, could not be deemed to be that of a tenant. He has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India but to my mind, this jurisdiction cannot be extended for protection of the possession of a trespasser against whom the order of the ejectment had become final. THE landlord; therefore, was entitled to get possession of the shop in dispute. This writ petition was, liable to be dismissed summarily at the stage of admissions It may also be observed that it will amount to misuse of this Court's process if under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, this Court protected illegal possession of trespassers.