J.C.Gupta, J. - (1.) Heard petitioners' counsel Sri Pankaj Mittal as well as Sri Framed Jain counsel appearing for the contesting-respondents.
(2.) These are three connected writ petitions- Writ Petition No. 28480 of 1995 and Writ Petition No. 4818 of 1996 arise out of the proceedings held under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), whereas Writ Petition No. 16612 of 1994 arises out of proceedings held by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer under Section 16 (1) (b) of the Act. Writ Petition Nos. 28480 of 1995 and 16612 of 1994 are by the landlord while Writ Petition No. 4818 of 1996 has been filed by the tenant.
(3.) The dispute relates to a residential premises No. 174/125 Anandpuri. Railway Road. Meerut. It appears that the landlord had allowed the contesting-respondents to occupy the disputed accommodation on rent without an order of allotment at a time when the petitioner was employed in government service. After his retirement, the landlord moved an application under Section 21 |l] (a) of the Act for the release of a tenanted portion which is part of his house. The release application was contested by the respondents and the same was allowed by the Prescribed Authority by the order dated 1.3.1993. Appeal filed by the tenant was, however, allowed by the order dated 18.4.95. Against the said order the landlord has filed Writ Petition No. 28480 of 1995. It further appears that in the meantime the landlord also moved an application for review before the Appellate Authority and the same was allowed by the order dated 25.1.1996 whereby the order allowing the appeal was recalled and the release application of the landlord has been allowed. Against this order of the Appellate Authority, the tenant has filed Writ Petition No. 4818 of 1996.;