Rajesh Tandon, J. - (1.)Heard Sri Sudhir Kumar, Counsel for the petitioner and Sri T. Phartiyal, Counsel for the respondent No. 3 and 4. Present application has been filed for reviewing the order dated 22nd December, 2006 on the following grounds. - -
3. Because although under law it is not permissible to delegate the delegated powers but assuming, not admitting, that the powers can be delegated there is no delegation of powers by the District Magistrate Udham Singh Natar to the Sub -Divisional Magistrate Kashipur to exercise the powers under Sec. 21(8) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent & Eviction) Act, 1972.

4. Because in absence of delegation of powers by the District Magistrate Udham Singh Nagar to the Sub -Divisional Magistrate, Kashipur to exercise the powers under Sec. 21(8) of the U.P. Urban Building (Regulation of Letting, Rent & Eviction) Act, 1972 the order passed by the Sub -Divisional Magistrate Kashipur is null and void.

5. Because if there was a valid delegation power by the District Magistrate Udham Singh Nagar to the Sub Divisional Magistrate Kashipur to exercise the powers under Sec. 21(8) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulations of Letting, Rent & Eviction) Act, 1972 the matter should have been remanded to the lower Appellate Court to decide the appeal on merit.

6. Because while enhancing the rent of the accommodation in question the Hon'ble Court has not taken into consideration that only a part of the house is under tenancy of the Power Corporation.

(2.)Counsel for the petitioner has filed an objection against the said review stating therein to the following effect. - -
1. That the application is based on wrong facts and is not legally maintainable.

2. That the above named writ petition was decided after hearing the Counsel for the parties and the Counsel for the review petitioner was also heard on merits of the case.

(3.)That the matters now raised by the respondent/review petitioner have been dealt with by the Hon'ble Court in the judgment under review.
3. In my judgment dated 22.12.2006, I have already observed in paragraphs 16, 18 and 19 as under. - -

16. Further, taking into consideration the findings of the Appellate Authority, no ground of interference by the Appellate Court is made out on the following two fold grounds. - -

(i) No notification has been pointed out so as to exclude the jurisdiction of the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Kashipur for deciding the application under Sec. 21(8) of the Act.

(ii) Even assuming the Rent Control and Eviction Officer at Kashipur has no jurisdiction, the District Judge has power to decide the appeal on merits.

18. Coming to the merits of the present case, as will appear from the report of the value given by respondents Nos. 3 & 4, the following valuation has been given. - -

This is to certify that the cost of the constructed building for office Assistant Engineer Electric Testing Laboratory, Patel Nagar, Bazpur Road, Kashipur, Distt. Udham Singh Nagar, Area of building is approximately 110.44 sq. mt. at rates 2100.00 per sq. mt. Now cost of building is turns out approximately i.e. 2,31,924.00.

;