- (1.) S. P. Mehrotra, J. The present Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Con stitution of India, inter alia, praying for quashing the order dated 28-8-1993 (Annexure No. 5 to the Writ Petition) passed by the Rent Control and Evic tion Officer (First), Allahabad (Respon dent No. 1 ).
(2.) THE dispute relates to a portion of Building No. 16, Sarai Khuldabad, Al lahabad. The said portion has here in after been referred to as the "disputed portion". It was, inter alia, state d in the Writ Petition that the respondent No. 3 (Prashant Sahu) filed an application dated 19-12-199c for allotment of the disputed building; and that on the said allotment, application, the respondent No. 1 [rent, Control and Eviction Officer (First), Allahabad] ordered the Rent Control Inspector to inspect the disputed portion; and that in pursuance there to , the Rent Control Inspector in spected the disputed portion and sub mitted his report dated 3-8-1991. Copy of the said Rent Control Inspector's report has been filed as An nexure No. 1 to the Writ Petition.
(3.) IT was, inter alia, further state d in the Writ petition that the respondent No. 2 (Kundan Lal-landlord of the disputed portion) had already moved an applica tion under Section 21 of the U. P Act No. XIII of 1972 for the eviction of the petitioner from the disputed portion; and that the respondent No. 3 (Prashant Sahu) was the real nephew of the respondent No. 2 (Kundan Lal-landlord); and that the allotment ap plication moved by the respondent No. 3 (Prashant Sahu) before the respon dent No. 1 was the outcome of the hatched conspiracy between the respondent No. 2 and the respondent No. 3 with a common design to short-circuit the proceedings under Section 21 of the U. P Act No. XIII of 1972 (hereinafter also referred to as the "act"); and that the said allotment ap plication filed by the respondent No. 3 was absolutely mala fide and collusive. It was, inter alia, further state d in the Writ Petition that the respondent No. 3 (Prashant Sahu) was a permanent resident of House No. 14, Sarai Khul dabad, Allahabad; and that the said House No. 14, Sarai Khuldabad was owned by the father of the respondent No. 3, namely, Sangam Lal, who was the real brother of the respondent No. 2; and that the said respondent No. 3 was constructing a palacial building on the site No. 58, Sarai Khuldabad, Al lahabad; and that the petitioner lives only in two rooms in the said disputed portion.;