- (1.) SUDHIR Narain, J. The petitioner seeks writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 21-8-1990 passed by the Prescribed Authority releasing the accommodation in question in favour of landlord-respondent Nos. 3 and 4 under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (here inafter referred to as the Act) and the order dated 26-5-1992 passed by the Appellate Authority, respondent No. 1, dismissing the appeal against the aforesaid order.
(2.) RESPONDENT Nos. 3 and 4 are co-owners and landlords of House No. 120/562, Shivaji Nagar, Kanpur. The petitioner was let out the ground floor portion of the disputed house consisting of four rooms besides the amenities attached to it. RESPONDENT Nos. 3 and 4 are residing on the first floor of the same house consisting of four rooms on the first floor and a Dochhatti and a room on the second floor. They filed application for release of the accommodation in question u/s 21 (1) (a) of the Act in the year 1986 on the allegation that their son Tribhuwan Kishore Tiwari, who was employed at B. I. C. Sugar Mills, Chhapra, Bihar, has been transferred to Kanpur. He occupied two rooms on the first floor. His family consists of his wife and a daughter. Their second son Ajai Kishore Tiwari is occupying two rooms on the first floor. His third son Uma Shankar Tiwari is living in Dochhatti and a small room. RESPONDENT Nos. 3 and 4 are aged and also feel difficulty in residing on the first floor and second floor. Their daughter, Savita, also comes and resides in the accommoda tion. The accommodation with them is hardly sufficient for their need. It was further stated that the wife of the tenant-petitioner has acquired House No. 117/l/17-A, Kaka Dev, Kanpur and the petitioner can shift to the said accommodation. The petitioner contested the said application. It was stated that one V. S. Mittal had vacated the accommodation in the year 1985 and one Japan Banerji vacated the accommodation in the year 1987 and those accommodations are suffi cient for the family members of the landlord. It was further stated that Sri Tribhuwan Kishore Tiwari is not residing in the disputed accommodation. The Prescribed Authority allowed the application on the finding that Tribhuwan Kishore Tiwari has been transferred from B. I. C. Sugar Mills, Chhapra, Bihar to Kanpur and is residing with the landlords. It was further found that Sri V. S. Mittal vacated the accommodation in the year 1985 but the same accommodation, consist ing of two rooms, its now in occupation of Ajai Kishore Tiwari. The accommodation occupied by Tapan Banerji was vacated in the year 1987, which consisted of Dochhatti, was in occupation of Uma Shankar Tiwari, son of the landlords. It was further found that the petitioner had acquired House No. 117/l/17-A, Kaka Dev, Kanpur in the name of his wife in the year 1983 in vacant state and thereafter it was let out by the wife of the petitioner in July, 1983 for four years and the period expired on 31st July, 1987. The lease was renewed for further five years which was to expire on 31-7-1992. It was held that the petitioner has no right to raise objection in view of Explanation (i) to S. 21 (1) of the Act. The release application was allowed by the Prescribed Authority by order dated 21-8- 1990. The petitioner preferred an appeal against the said order and the Appellate Authority has dismissed the appeal by order dated 26-5-1992. These orders have been challenged in the present writ petition.
(3.) I have heard Sri A. N. Sinha learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K. L. Grover learned Counsel for the respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that one V. S. Mittal was tenant on the first floor accommodation. He was in occupation of two rooms and vacated the same but the landlord has not disclosed this fact in his application. Similarly one Tapan Banerji was tenant in Dochhatti of the disputed accommodation who has also vacated. A perusal of the order of the prescribed authority indicates that these facts, were taken into consideration and it was found that Sri V. S. Mittal was in occupation of two rooms and after his vacation in the year 1985 the same is in occupation the son of the landlord. Similarly Tapan Banerji was tenant of a small Dochhatti and after his vacation the same is in occupation of another son of the landlord.;