R.H. Zaidi, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and also perused the record.
(2.) By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for issuance of writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 12.10.2000 whereby the appeal filed by respondent No. 2 against the order of the Prescribed Authority, dated 2.7.2000, has been allowed by the Appellate Authority.
(3.) It appears that the petitioner filed an application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act No. 13 of 1972, for short the Act, as he wanted to settle his sons in business. It was stated that the need for the shop in question was genuine and bona fide. The plea of hardship was also taken. The application was objected to and opposed by the contesting respondent No. 2, who has pleaded that the need of the petitioner was neither bona fide nor genuine and that there was absolutely no question of suffering any hardship by him, in case the release application was rejected. Parties in support of their cases, produced evidence, oral and documentary. The Prescribed Authority after going through the evidence on the record, recorded findings on the question of need and hardship in favour of the applicant and allowed the application by judgment and order dated 25.7.2000. Challenging the validity of the said order, respondent No. 2 filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority after hearing the Counsel for the parties and perusing the material on the record, reversed the findings recorded by the Prescribed Authority. It was held that the need of the applicant for the shop in question was neither genuine nor bona fide and there was no question of suffering any hardship if the said application was rejected. Having recorded the said findings, the appeal was allowed by judgment and order dated 12.10.2000. Hence the present petition.;