RAJ KUMAR Vs. I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE ALLAHABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India arising out of proceedings under the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

(2.) THE property in dispute is a shop in house no. 86, Bhusauli Tola, Allahabad. THE case of the petitioner is that he is carrying on the business of a tea stall in the said shop for the last several years and that he occupied the premises before the coming into force of the Act.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has raised two contentions before me. His first contention is that he is a tenant in occupation of the shop in question with the consent of the landlord prior to 5th July, 1976, and, as such, he cannot be deemed to be an unauthorised occupant and, as such, the order declaring vacancy of the property is not an order valid in law. The second submission of the learned counsel is that even if the property is declared to be vacant, his case for allotment should, however, have been considered by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer and since his case has not been considered, the order is vitiated in law.