Anjani Kumar, J. - (1.) This writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner who claims himself to be tenant of the accommodation in question which is a shop, challenges the order passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Kanpur Nagar, dated 2nd February, 2005.
(2.) The brief facts are that the landlord-respondent No. 2, filed an application before the respondent No. 1, Rent Control and Eviction Officer, with the assertion that the petitioner is occupying the shop in dispute unauthorizedly without any allotment order and, therefore, there is a deemed vacancy under Section 12 of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The landlord further filed an application under Section 16(1)(b) of the Act that the aforesaid shop may be released in his favour as he requires the same for his personal use.
(3.) In short the case set up by the petitioner is that he is tenant since April, 1976 and he is regularly paying rent to the respondent-landlord who never issued any rent receipt. The landlord in order to pressurize the tenant to enhance the rent arbitrarily filed the aforesaid application. It is, wholly incorrect to say that the landlord requires the accommodation in question for his personal use nor the shop in question is legally vacant. A concocted story has been set up by the landlord in the application, in question. The petitioner further submitted that on application of the landlord the Rent Control Inspector has visited the shop in question in the absence of the petitioner and submitted some sort of inspection report without either inspecting the shop and also without any information to the petitioner. The said report is not based on facts.;