JAGDISH PRASAD Vs. IST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MATHURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against the order of Prescribed Authority dated 3.5.1985 allowing the application filed by the landlord respondent under Section 21 (1) (a) and (b) of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 on the allegation that he bona fide requires it for his personal use. The application was contested by the petitioner. The Prescribed Authority has allowed it by his order dated 3.5.1985 and this order has been affirmed by the Appellate Authority on 28.8.1987.

(2.) I have heard Sri Ramji Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Janardan Sahai, learned counsel for the respondents.

(3.) Briefly stated the facts are that respondent No. 3 purchased the shop in question from its erstwhile owner on 26.6.1972. He filed application under Section 21 (1) (a) and (b) of the Act against the petitioner on 31.5.1977 on the allegation that the shop in question is in dilapidated condition and requires demolition and reconstruction. It was further stated that after demolition of the shop, he will reconstruct it and utilise it for residential purpose as the accommodation with him for his family members is insufficient. The Prescribed Authority rejected the application on 28.3.1978. Respondent No. 3 preferred appeal and the appeal was dismissed on 27.7.1978. After about three years, respondent No. 3, again filed application for release under Section 21 (1) (a) and (b) of the Act on the allegation that the condition of the building has further deteriorated and the members of family have increased and, therefore, the disputed accommodation be released for demolition and reconstruction and for his bona fide need for residential purpose. The Prescribed Authority on consideration of material evidence on the record allowed the application on 3.5.1985 and released the disputed accommodation. The petitioner preferred an appeal against this order. The Appellate Authority has dismissed it on 28.8.1987.