Sudhir Narain Agarwal, J. - (1.) THE petitioner has challenged the order dated 2.11.1991 (Annexure 8 to the writ petition), passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Allahabad and has further sought a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to restore the possession of the premises in dispute. The petitioner owns House No. 80 (new No. 205), Tagore Town, Allahabad. She constructed first floor on the same house in the year 1977 and it was numbered 80/1 (new No. 208) Tagore Town, Allahabad. The petitioner let out both the portions of the house to G.B. Pant Social Science Institute for office purpose (hereinafter referred to as the "Institute").
(2.) THE Institute constructed its own building and shifted there in the year, 1990 and vacated both the portions on 30th April, 1990. The petitioner intimated the vacancy to the Rent Control and Eviction Officer on 2nd May, 1990 by filing an application as well as by sending a copy of the intimation by registered post. The house remained vacant and no action appears to have been taken. One Jawahar Singh filed an application dated 26.10.1991 for allotment of the accommodation in question. On this application the Rent Control and Eviction Officer directed the Rent Control Inspector to make an inquiry. The Rent Control Inspector inspected the accommodation in question on 28.10.1991. He submitted a report on the same day stating that he contacted the petitioner to inform that G.B. Pant Social Science Institute was a tenant who has shifted to its own accommodation at Jhunsi. She, however, refused to give anything in writing. He also contacted Sri Jagat Narain Misra who gave in writing that the accommodation was vacant. Relying upon the said report the Rent Control and Eviction Officer has passed an order declaring the vacancy on 2.11.1991. On 8th November, 1991 Dr. Amar Singh, respondent No. 2 also filed an application for allotment of the accommodation in question and another application for allotment was filed on behalf of the Additional Director, C.G.H.S. Allahabad on 16.11.1991 and on the same date the accommodation was allotted in favour of respondent No. 2. He obtained the possession after the allotment order was passed. The petitioner has filed a revision against the allotment order which is still pending. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order of vacancy as the question of vacancy cannot be gone into in revision by the learned District Judge filed under Section 18 of the U.P. Urban Building (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').
(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order declaring the vacancy was illegal as it was based on the report of the Rent Control Inspector who did not comply with the requirement of R.8(2) of the Rules framed under the Act. He did not intimate to the petitioner the date fixed for inspection. The inspection of the building was not made in her presence and he had not obtained the statement of the petitioner and two respectable persons of the locality. The petitioner, even after the report was submitted was not intimated about it and thereby she was deprived of her right to file objection against the report of the Inspector. The conclusion of the inspection report was also not pasted on the notice board of the office of the Rent Control and Eviction Officer. The report of the Rent Control Inspector has been annexed as Annexure 6 to the writ petition. It indicates that he contacted the petitioner and the petitioner was present at the time of the inspection and she had herself intimated that G.B. Pant Social Science Institute was a tenant who vacated the same after it was shifted to Jhunsi. He also elicited the fact from one Jagat Narain Mishra who also affirmed that the house was vacant.;