- (1.) A. K. Yog, J. This petition under Ar ticle 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by Smt. Asha Sahu and others claiming to be 'landlords' of 'non-residen tial accommodation' a shop (in building, the shop No. 321, Bahadurganj, Allahabad) Measuring 15'x6'-Called the shop.
(2.) PETITIONERS seek to challenge judg ment and order dated 2-8-1997 (Annexure No. 7) passed by Respondent No. I/appel late authority under Section 22 U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (called 'the Act') whereby it set aside judgment and order dated 21-4-93 passed by the Prescribed Authority (Annexure 5 to the Writ Peti tion) on the Release application (Annexure 2 to the Writ Petition) registered as PA Case No. 15 of 1991. Petitioner No. 1 is the wife whereas petitioners No. 2, 3 And 4 are sons and daughter of Prem Shanker Sahu erstwhile landlord. They filed a 'release' applica tion on the ground that the shop was let out by the late Prem Shanker Sahu to augment his income and when his children were minor. Prem Shanker Sahu died on 21-9-1993. Business of cycle repairing car ried on by Prem Shanker Sahu was stopped on the death of husband of Petitioner No. 1. Since Deepak Kumar (son of deceased Prem Shanker Sahu) who was studying in intermediate wanted the shop for repair ing of electronic gadgets like radio, tape, TV etc. on the basis of his skill acquired by undergoing training at S. R. C. Training In stitute, it was to settle his son, Deepak Sahu as well as to augment income for subsistence and maintenance of the family. The tenant filed a written state ment (Annexure 3 to the Writ Petition ). It was not denied that he obtained posses sion of the shop on the basis of an agree ment. Learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 has placed photo-copy of the allot ment order which indicates that the shop allotted in his favour was bigger than the area which he actually occupied as a result of the agreement. Be that as it may be, respondent No. 2 cannot be allowed to raise grievance at this stage because he himself voluntarily agreed to take the shop on rent on the terms and conditions con tained in the agreement (Annexure No. 1 to the Writ Petition ). The above fact is clear from para 4 of the written statement (Annexure No. 3 to the Writ Petition at page 30 of the paper book ).
(3.) THE Prescribed Authority allowed the Release application vide judgment and order dated 21. 4. 93 (Annexure 5 to the Writ Petition ). Feeling aggrieved tenant filed ap peal No. 181 of 1993. Commissioner's report was obtained and certain docu ments were also filed by the parties at the Appellate stage. The appellate Court al lowed the appeal vide impugned judgment and order dated 2. 8. 97.;