D.D. Seth, J. - (1.) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and arises out of the following circumstances: The house in dispute - house No. 2, Hewett Road, Allahabad was owned by one Jagannath Prasad. On 10th August, 1927 he executed a will by which he dedicated the house to Sri Hanumanji and installed an idol of Sri Hanumanji therein. It was provided in the will that as long as Sri Jagannath Prasad would be alive he would continue to be the proprietor of the house but after his death the house would become the property of Sri Hanumanji Maharaj Virajman in Kothri No. 8. The will further provided that the Mutwalli of the trust property would be the two daughters of the executant, Smt. Bittan alias Ram Piari and Smt. Bunni Devi. After the death of Sri Jagannath Prasad in 1943 Smt. Bittan and Smt. Bunni Devi became the Mutwalli of the house in dispute. Smt. Bittan died sometime nine years after the death of Jagannath Prasad and thereafter Smt. Bunni Devi became the sole trustee of the endowed property. A shop in the house in dispute was let out to the petitioner during the life time of Sri Jagannath Prasad and the petitioner had been running the business of second hand and new books in the said shop under the name and style "M/s. Students Friends, Allahabad." Another shop in the same house was in the occupation of the two sons of Smt. Bunni Devi who also ran their business of stationery and books under the name and style "Bharat Book Depot."
(2.) Smt. Bunni Devi filed an application under Sec. 3 of the U.P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act (hereinafter called the Act) before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer praying that permission be granted to her to file a suit for ejectment against the petitioner from the shop in his occupation as it was needed for the business of one of her sons which she attributed to be her personal use. The petitioner filed an objection against the application of Smt. Bunni Devi and alleged that the same had not been made bona fide and that it was not maintainable at the instance of Smt. Bunni Devi on the ground of personal need as she was only a Mutwalli of the property and was not an owner thereof in her personal capacity. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer granted permission to Smt. Bunni Devi under Sec. 3 of the Act and held that the application was maintainable.
(3.) Aggrieved by the order passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer the petitioner went up in revision before the Commissioner, Allahabad. Before the revision could be heard the petitioner filed an application on 27th August, 1962 before the Commissioner for addition of certain grounds in the memo of revision. The learned Commissioner allowed the petitioner's application. When the revision came up for bearing on 4th January, 1963 a preliminary objection was raised on behalf of the petitioner that the application of Smt. Bunni Devi was not maintainable under Sec. 3 of the Act on the ground that the house in dispute was an endowed property and Smt. Bunni Devi could not claim permission to accommodate her son in the endowed shop as it would mean giving preference to one tenant at the cost of another tenant. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner the learned Commissioner rejected the preliminary objection. The revision was then heard on merits and was dismissed on 29th January, 1963. The petitioner, feeling aggrieved by the orders passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer and the Commissioner, Allahabad, has preferred this petition and has prayed that a writ of certiorari be issued and the orders dated 13th August, 1962 and 29th January, 1963 passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer and the Commissioner, Allahabad, respectively be quashed.;