V.M. Sahai, J. - (1.) Heard Shri Vishnu Sahai learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No. 1 and Shri Pramod Kumar Jain learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 2.
(2.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the order declaring vacancy. It is not disputed by learned Counsel for the petitioner that the premises was allotted to him and his father, mother, brother and brother's wife were shown to be members of the family of the petitioner. However, the petitioner joined a fresh service in Delhi and is residing at Delhi. In this view of the matter under Section 12 (a) of U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 deemed vacancy has rightly been declared by respondent No. 1.
(3.) I do not find any error in the order passed by respondent No. 1.;