N.L.Ganguly - (1.) THIS petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is by the landlords of premises No. 2/33 (old)r 2/238, Bhotia, Parao, Haldwani, District Nainital. The petitioners prayed for a writ or a direction quashing the order dated 5-1-93 and 4-7-93 passed by the City Magistrate exercising the powers of the Prescribed Authority under U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972. Further it was prayed that a direction be issued to the respondent no. 1 to decide the revision, arising out of the orders dated 5-1-93 and 4-7-93 within a reasonable time to be fixed by the High Court.
(2.) THE premises mentioned above belonged to Dr. Sumitra Vinayak the mother of the petitioners. THE petitioners became owners by inheritance of the property through a will dated 7-10-91. Dr. Smt. Sumitra Vinayak died on 19-8-92. THE premises in dispute was formerly in the tenancy of Labour Commissioner, Kumaun Mandal Haldwani, who vacated the premises on 20-11-92. THE premises was declared as vacant. THE petitioners pleaded that they needed the premises in question for their personal use and occupation and sought for the release. The release application of the landlord-petitioners was opposed by a prospective allottee, the Regional Food Controller, who had filed a letter dated 4-7-92 said to have been written by Dr. Amrit Lal, father of the petitioners offering to let out his share in the premises in dispute. The respondent no. 2 without considering the affidavits of the petitioners in support of the release application relying upon the evidence adduced on behalf of the Regional Food Controller rejected the release application of the petitioners by order dated 4-1-93. The petitioners denied to have issued the letter dated 4-7-92 by Dr. Amrit Lal, who had no authority to let out the premises in dispute. The petitioners filed revision under section 18 of the Act against the decision of the Prescribed Authority which was numbered as Revision No. 2 of 1993 and is pending. The respondent no. 2 is said to have passed orders for allotment under section 16 of the Act on 5-1-93. The petitioners filed a revision against the allotment order dated 5-1-1993 before the District Judge under section 18 of the Act which was numbered as Rent Control Revision No. 1 of 1993 and is pending. The Incharge District Judge, while admitting the revision filed by the petitioners passed an interim order of stay dated 8-1-1993 quoted as under :- "9-C. Heard, issue notice, fixing 2-2-93 for hearing and dispossal. Till then the operation of the allotment order dated 5-3-93 shall remain stayed."
(3.) IT is said that the operation of the stay order dated 8-1-93 had been received by respondent no. 3, i.e. the Superintendent of Police (R), Haldwani, District Nainital on 8-1 -93 itself. In the night between 8/9th January, 1993 by heavy police force possession of the premises in question had been taken and the belongings of the petitioners were thrown away at the instance of respondent no. 3. The petitioners tried to resist the illegal action of the respondent no. 3 and the police force, but of no consequence. The petitioners are said to have sent telegram to the Governor of the State of U. P. on 9-1-93, One F.I.R. was also lodged on 9-1-93 at P. S. Haldwani, District Nainital against the respondents.;