M.KATJU, J. - (1.) THIS Writ Petition No. 22376 of 1990 and the Writ Petition No. 8680 of 1991 are being heard and disposed of by a common judgment.
(2.) THE respondent No. 2 is landlady of the house in dispute and the petitioner is tenant thereof. The house was declared vacant by order dated 9.7.90, Annexure 7 to the petition and, thereafter, the landlady filed release application under Section 16 which has been allowed by order dated 27.7.90 and the revision against that order has been rejected by the order dated 21.1.91 which is Annexure 2 to Writ Petition No. 8680 of 1991. Aggrieved this petition has been filed. It has been held by the Full Bench in Talib Husain v. A.D.J., 1986(2) RCR 230(Allahabad) (FB) : 1986(1) ARC 1, that if the landlord filed release application under Section 16, the prospective allottee has no right to object to the same. This is also the view of the Supreme Court vide Vijay Kumar Sonkar v. District Judge, 1994(1) SCC 646. The petitioner's contention is that there was an agreement between him and the landlady, a true copy of which is Annexure 1 to the Writ Petition No. 22376 of 1991. However, it has been held by another Full Bench in Nutan Kumar v. A.D.J., 1993(2) ARC 205, that such agreement is wholly void unless it was passed in pursuance of an allotment order. Admittedly, there was no allotment in favour of the petitioner.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner then contended that the U.P. Urban Buildings Act, 1972, has no application. This plea was never taken in the Court below and hence I do not permit the petitioner to argue this plea at this stage. In the circumstances the writ petition is dismissed. However, on the facts and circumstances of the case to grant one year time to the petitioner to vacate the premises in dispute. The petitioner shall hand over peaceful and vacant possession to the respondent No. 2 on or before 1.5.96 and shall pay rent regularly till then. Petition dismissed.;