R.H.Zaidi, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record.
(2.) By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners pray for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 24.5.1998 whereby the building No. 113/68 (residential), Swaroop Nagar, Kanpur Nagar, consisting of three rooms etc. has been declared vacant by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer.
(3.) It appears that originally Mr. W. G. Gogte, the father of petitioner Nos. 1, 2 and 4, and husband of petitioner No. 3, was the tenant of the said building, who died leaving behind the petitioners as his heirs and legal representatives. The petitioners who have been living in the building in question after his death, inherited the tenancy but it was in the year 1996 that an intimation of vacancy is alleged to have been given by the petitioner No. 1 as the petitioners were going to vacate the building in question as they wanted to shift to Indore. An application for allotment was also filed by one Dr. Vijay Kumar Dwivedi. On the aforesaid Intimation and application, proceedings under Sections 16/12 of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act. U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972 (for short 'the Act'), were initiated. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer directed the Rent Control Inspector to Inspect the building in question and to submit the report. Thereafter, notices are stated to have been Issued to the parties. On receipt of notice, an objection was filed by the petitioners contending that they have never given any intimation of vacancy and rent was regularly being paid by them to the landlord. The building in question was thus vacant. The Rent Control Inspector, thereafter made local inspection of the building and also examined witnesses of the locality and recorded the statements of local witnesses and submitted his report dated 13.11.1996 with the observation that prima facie the building in question was vacant for the reasons recorded by him in his report. On receipt of the said report, notices were issued to the parties. The petitioners filed objection contending that no Intimation of vacancy was given to them, they were in occupation of the building and rent was being paid by them. In the meanwhile, landlord also made an application for release of the building. Parties in support of their cases produced evidence. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer, after going through the evidence on record passed the order dated 24.9.1998 declaring the building in question as vacant in exercise of power under Section 16 read with Section 12 of the Act. Hence, the present petition.;