PRADEEP KUMAR GUPTA Vs. MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. U. Khan, J. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) THIS is tenant's writ petition. Property in dispute is a shop. Allotment application was filed before R. C. & E. O. , Allahabad by respondent No. 1 stating therein that shop in dispute was vacant. Matter was registered as Case No. 24 of 2001, Manoj Kumar Gupta v. Mahesh Prasad Gupta. R. C. & E. G. , (I), Allahabad through order dated 3. 8. 2002 held that there was no vacancy and rejected the release application of landlords respondents. Shop in dispute is situate in Katra Allahabad. Against order passed by R. C. & E. O. , dated 3. 8. 2002, revision was filed by Manoj Kumar Gupta the respondent No. 1 applicant for allotment being R. C. Revision No. 871 of 2002. A. D. J. , Court No. 7, Allahabad through judgment and order dated 26. 2. 2003 allowed the revision, set aside the order passed by R. C. & E. O. , dated 3. 8. 2002 and remanded the matter to the R. C. & E. O. , to consider allotment application filed by respondent No. 1, Manoj Kumar Gupta. The said order of the Revisional Court has been challenged through this writ petition. In this case. On 25. 7. 2008, 4. 8. 2008 and 28. 8. 2008, following orders were passed (on the order-sheet) : "25. 7. 2008 : THIS writ petition is directed against vacancy/declaration order. Learned Counsel for landlord respondent offers that as the height of the shop is about 17 to 20 feet, hence he is ready to make such construction in the shop that it is converted into two shops, one on the first floor and another on the ground floor and he is ready to leave one portion in the tenancy occupation of the tenant of his choice and will feel satisfied by release of the other portion. Let learned Counsel for tenant petitioner seek instruction from his client in this regard. List on 4. 8. 2008. 4. 8. 2008 : List in the next cause list. In terms of order dated 25. 7. 2008, parties are to discuss about possibility of compromise. Sri Ravi Kant, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for tenant petitioner, suggests that Sri Rajesh Gupta, learned Counsel for the landlord respondent, may come to his chamber so that detailed discussion regarding possibility of compromise may take place. Sri Rajesh Gupta, learned Counsel, agrees for the said suggestion. Accordingly, let the discussion as suggested may take place on any convenient date within a week. 28. 8. 2008 : In this case learned Counsel for both the parties state that compromise is almost being finalised and formal compromise application will be filed on 1. 9. 2008 for disposal of the writ petition in terms of the compro mise. Yesterday it was stated that there was consensus between the parties on the major points however on some minor points there was slight diversion thereupon the Court directed learned Counsel for both the parties to sit together and resolve even the minor points. Accordingly put up on 1. 9. 2008 for passing formal order or final disposal. "

(3.) IT is further directed that the local authority concerned shall not raise any unnecessary objection in respect of the map which is filed for making new construction. As a part of the newly constructed shop is to be given to the tenant, hence local authority shall decide the matter regarding permission to construct/ sanction of the map very expeditiously preferably within three weeks from the date on which certified copy of this order is filed.