- (1.) The petitioner-tenant having suffered an order of release under Section 21-(1)(a) of U.P. Act No.13, 1972, preferred an appeal under Section 22 of the aforesaid Act before the District Judge Lucknow. The learned Incharge District Judge while considering the application for interim relief, by the impugned order dated 09.12.2014 stayed the operation of the eviction order passed by the Prescribed Authority subject to the condition that the tenant-petitioner shall deposit monthly rent in respect of the disputed premises to be calculated in accordance with the circle rate of the area fixed by the Collector, Lucknow.
(2.) The tenant-petitioner feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order has preferred this writ petition on the ground that the learned appellant authority while passing orders on his application for interim relief has not clarified as to what amount of monthly rent is to be deposited by the tenant-petitioner. He has further submitted that the circle rate fixed by the District Collector has never been treated as a criteria for ascertaining the market value of the property. The circle rate is fixed only for the purposes of payment of stamp duty where the deed of transfer is registered. The accommodation in occupation of the tenant-petitioner is an open piece of land and if calculated as per the circle rate of the area, the value of the property would come out to be about Rs.1,80,000/- per month which is highly excessive and beyond the reach of the tenant-petitioner.
(3.) Since the contesting opposite parties No.2 to 14 have filed a short counter-affidavit and the petitioner does not want to file any rejoinder-affidavit, the writ petition is being finally disposed of at the admission stage with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.;