BIBI BEGUM Vs. AWADHESH NARAIN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri Ritu Raj Awasthi, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri H.S. Sahai, holding brief of Sri Deepak Seth, learned Counsel for the opposite parties.

(2.) . Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner an old widow lady has assailed the order of the Courts below whereby her application for release of the shop for settlement of her unemployed son has been rejected by the pre­scribed authority as well as appellate authority.

(3.) I have gone through the judgment rendered by the prescribed authority as well as appellate authority. The appellate authority has failed to see the relevant provisions of U.P. Act XIII of 1972 and the Rules made thereunder. Right from Apex Court to this Court, the law is settled that on submission of a release application, the tenant must look for alternative accommoda­tion/residential premises. Even as per the latest rent laws, the goodwill of a shop keeper or businessman would not play any dominant role because the good­will is like fragrance, which can travel any where, like flower's scent and the customers will go to the new location. This Court has dealt with this issue in Writ Petition No. 21 of 1999 (R/C). Bata Shoe Company and another v. VIIth Additional District Judge, Faizabad and others, which, as per learned Counsel for the petitioner, has been decided by the Apex Court.