SHIVDHARI Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri H. S. Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing counsel on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and Sri Govind Kumar Chaurasiya holding brief of Sri Mohan Singh on behalf of for opposite party No. 4.

(2.) In light of the proposed order notice to private respondent No. 5 is dispensed with.

(3.) It has been submitted that a housing lease was granted in favour of predecessor-in-interest of private re-spondent No. 5 which was duly approved on 4/12/1991. The petitioner moved a complaint under Sec. 66 of U.P. Revenue Code Rules, 2016 (herein-after referred to as the Rules of 2016) alleging that the private respondent has not constructed the house within three years of the grant of the said lease and, therefore, by operation of law as provided under Rule 64 of the Rules of 2016, the lease ought to be cancelled.