RAM NATH Vs. SPECIAL JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SUDHIR Narain, J. The petitioner seeks writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 27-5-1994 passed by the Prescribed Authority Bijnor, respondent No. 2, where by the application filed by landlord respon dent No. 3 under Section 21 (1) (b) of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (in short referred to as the Act) was allowed, and the order dated 9-4-1997 passed by respondent No. 1 dismissing the appeal against the aforesaid order.

(2.) RESPONDENT No. 3 filed application under Section 21 (1) (b) of the Act, on the allegation that the petitioner is tenant of the shop in question. It is in dilapidated condi tion. It needs demolition. After demolition of the construction, he will construct three shops, and is ready to give one shop to the petitioner after its reconstruction. The petitioner contested the application. It was denied that the shop was in dilapidated con dition. He was carrying on business of Sarafa in the shop in question.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the finding recorded by respondents 1 and 2 that the shop in question is in dilapidated condition. On perusal of the impugned orders I do not find that findings recorded by respondents 1 and 2 on the basis of evidence on record are illegal.