S.U.Khan, J. - (1.) All the substitution applications are allowed.
(2.) Property in dispute is residential in nature and is situate at 38 Balrampur House, Mumfordganj, Allahabad. The total extent of accommodation of the property in dispute is four rooms, three verandahs, one kitchen, one bathroom, two latrines, one storeroom, one courtyard and front lawn on the ground floor as is mentioned in the report of R.C.I dated 12.2.1990 annexure 1 to the first writ petition.
(3.) Vacancy of the property in dispute was declared by R.C & E.O, Allahabad on 30.7.1990. Thereafter on 13.8.1990, it was allotted to Surya Prakash Singh (S.P.Singh in short) original petitioner in the first writ petition since deceased and survived by his widow Sushila Singh and his daughter Anamika Singh. The case before R.C & E.O was registered as case No. 32 of 1990, T.N.Sinha v. S.P. Singh. In the allotment order no rent was fixed. Against allotment order, landlords Trijugi Narain Sinha (T.N.Sinha in short) and Suresh Narain Sinha (S.N.Sinha in short) filed revision being R.C Revision No. 194 of 1990. District Judge, Allahabad through judgment and order dated 16.4.1992, allowed the revision only and only on the ground that R.C & E.O in the allotment order dated 13.8.1990 had not fixed any rent. The matter was remanded to R.C. & E.O through order dated 16.4.1992 which has been challenged through first writ petition. In the revision landlords had taken other please also. They also filed writ petition against the said order of revisional court being writ petition No. 24596 of 1992. The said writ petition was disposed of on 9.6.1992 and it was directed that landlords were at liberty to take all the points which they had raised in the memorandum of revision and Rent Control and Eviction Officer should consider the said points. The revisional court by order dated 16.4.1992 had set-aside the allotment order in favour of S.P.Singh dated 13.8.1990 hence landlords filed application for possession under section 18(3) of U.P Act No. 13 of 1972. First writ petition was dismissed in default on 24.3.1993 and thereafter it was restored on 12.9.2005. After dismissal in default of the said writ petition landlords pressed their application for redelivery of possession under Section 18(3) of the Act. Through order dated 6.7.1995 R.C. & E.O refused to deliver the possession under section 18(3) of the Act until final decision of the entire matter in pursuance of remand order dated 16.4.1992 passed by the revisional court. Through the second writ petition of 1995, order dated 6.7.1995 has been challenged. Order dated 30.7.1990 declaring the vacancy was also sought to be challenged thereafter through amendment in the said writ petition.;