RAJENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL Vs. IIIRD A D J

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ Petition No. 41143 of 1998 and Writ Petition No. 42141 of 1998 have been filed by the tenants for quashing of the judgment and order dated 15.5.1996 passed by the prescribed authority/Civil Judge (Junior Division) Etah and the judgment and order dated 6.11.1998 passed by the IIIrd Additional District Judge, Etah, whereby the application for release of the premises in dispute under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred as the Act) filed by respondent No. 3 Someshwar Prasad Goswami was allowed and the appeal against the same under Section 22 of the Act was dismissed.

(2.) Writ Petition No. 38949 of 1997 has been filed by unauthorised occupant against the order of the Rent Control & Eviction Officer, Etah, dated 24.10.1997, whereby vacancy was declared in the premises in dispute under Section 12 of the Act.

(3.) Since in all three cases the initial proceedings were taken under Section 21(1)(a) of the Act by the landlord Someswar Prasad Goswami and while deciding all the three applications the prescribed authority vide common judgment dated 14.5.1996 had held that Ravindra Singh Yadav (petitioner in Writ Petition No. 38949 of 1997) was an unauthorized occupant and, therefore, decree of eviction could not have been passed against him and as such dismissed the release application against him. Consequent thereof proceeding under Section 12/16 of the Act were initiated and vacancy was declared on 24.10.1997 against which the third petition was filed. The facts being similar and the landlord's need being common all the three petitions are being heard and decided together with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.