RAM ASREY LAL Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner is the landlord of an accommodation in Mohalla Bazar Katra, Bisalpur town, District Pilibhit. One Brahma Nand was its tenant. A suit for his ejectment was filed by the Petitioner which was decreed and in execution of that decree the possession was delivered to the Petitioner. It appears that subsequently an order of allotment was passed in favour of Respondents 3 to 6 on 26th July 1973. An appeal was filed by the Petitioner against that order which was dismissed by the District Judge on 21st September, 1973. A notice was also issued in the meantime on 29th July, 1973 to the Petitioner to show cause as to why he may not be prosecuted under Section 31 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 for having acted in defiance of the order of allotment dated 26th July, 1973. The order of allotment dated 26th July, 1973 passed by the Prescribed Authority and the notice issued by him on 29th July, 1973 as also the appellate order of the District Judge dated 21st September, 1973 are sought to be quashed in the present writ petition.

(2.) IT was urged by counsel for the Petitioner that the order of allotment was illegal for non -compliance of the mandatory provisions of Rule 8(2) and Rule 9(3) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972. Having heard counsel for the parties, I am of opinion that there is substance in this submission. As is apparent from the record, the inspection contemplated by Rule 8(2) was not carried out in the presence of the Petitioner nor was any notice given to the Petitioner of the date on which the question of allotment was to be considered as was required to be given by Rule 9(3). In Arun Kumar v. District Judge Orai : 1976 AWC 103 it was held, "Rule 8 of the rules framed under 1972 Act, provides for an opportunity being given to the landlord and to prospective tenants to apply for allotment of premises which fall vacant. The rule has obviously been introduced in order to safe -guard the interest of the landlord and prospective allottees. The landlord can, when inspection is made by the Inspector, bring to his notice that the accommodation is not vacant and after the inspector's report and its being pasted on the notice board, can file objections against the report.... The procedure set out in Rule 8 of 1972 Act has been designed to comply with the requirements of the principle of natural justice and also to give a fair opportunity to all persons who may be in need of the accommodation.... Sub -rule (2) of Rule 8 of the Act enshrines principles of natural justice, and gives an opportunity to prospective allottees to apply for accommodation which is, or is likely to fall vacant.... Without compliance with Rule 8(2) the order of allotment would be violative of the principles of natural justice and would not satisfy the legislative intent enshrined in Rule 8."

(3.) IN the result, the writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The order of allotment dated 26th July, 1973 passed by the Prescribed Authority as also the notice issued by him on 29th July, 1973 and the order of the District Judge dated 21st September, 1973 are quashed. In the circumstances of the case, however, the parties will bear their own costs.