J.K. Tandon, J. - (1.) The petitioners were in occupation of house bearing municipal no. 1 situate at Shahjahanpur Road in the town of Bareilly. They were using it both for purposes of residence and for keeping their vehicles which they ply on hire. These vehicles are, according to them, stationed on the land, part of the premises in front of the main building. The second respondent, who is Adarsh Handloom Weaver's Co-operative Society Ltd., have purchased the above building from its previous owner in October 1957. After the purchases the President of the Society, it is alleged, moved the District Magistrate apparently under the provisions of the U.P. Control of Rent and Eviction Act to enable them ultimately to occupy the building for the purposes of their factory. This is evidenced by notice dated 1st March 1958, Annexure 'B' to the petitioner's main affidavit, which purported to require the petitioners to permit inspection of the building under Sec. 7-G of the above Act. It does not appear that any action thereafter was taken by the District Magistrate under the U. P. Control of Rent and Eviction Act but on 15th March 1958 the District Magistrate of Bareilly purporting to act under Sec. 3 of the U. P. (Temporary) Accommodation Requisition Act, 1947 requisitioned the said accommodation by the following order : "Where as an accommodation is required for setting up a hand loom factory on co-operative lines by the Adarsh Hand-loom Weavers Co-operative Society Ltd., which in my opinion is a public purpose. The Kothi No. 1 at Shahjahanpur Road, situated in Mohalla Seefitola would suit this purpose and the Society has purchased the property rights of the premises. 1, G. M. Nigam, I. A. S. District Magistrate, Bareilly, under the powers conferred on me under Sec. 3 of the U. P. (Temporary) Accommodation requisition Act, 1947 requisition the aforesaid building for the aforesaid purpose and order that the possession of the building shall be handed over to the President of the Adarsh Handloora Co-operative Society Ltd., within 15 days of the receipt of this order, by the persons occupying it."
(2.) The order has also mentioned that the petitioners are being provided with the alternative accommodation. This was considered necessary under the second proviso to Sec. 3 of the U. P. (Temporary) Accommodation Requisition Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the Accommodation Requisition Act) as the petitioners were in occupation of the building.
(3.) The petitioners have challenged the validity of the above requisition on various grounds. They are that the Accommodation Requisition Act does not contemplate requisitions for the benefit of Co-operative Societies which is factually a very limited body formed for the profit of the individuals constituting that society, so that the purpose of the society cannot be said to be a public purpose; again that Sec. 3 of the Accommodation Requisition Act can be utilised for requisitioning an accommodation for a public purpose only where such requisitioning is necessary under the circumstances, and that the above two conditions, so necessary for a requisition under Sec. 3, did not exist in this case. According to him, therefore, the requisition had been made for the purposes of the owner as, however, was outside the purview of Sec. 3. It is also said that the District Magistrate did not apply his mind in deciding the needs of requisitioning, on the other hand, simply signed the order prepared by the Rent Controller who had no jurisdiction to determine these facts on the existence of which alone action under Sec. 3 was possible.;