- (1.) SUDHIR Narain, J. This writ peti tion is directed against the order of the Prescribed Authority dated 25-3-1995 releasing the shop in question in favour of landlady - respondent No. 3 and the order of the appellate authority dated 5-5-1998 affirming the said order in appeal.
(2.) THE facts, in brief, are that respon dent No. 3 filed application for release of the shop in question under Section 21 (l) (a) of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regula tion of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (in short 'the Act') for release of the shop in question on the allegation that her son Abhinandan Sharma will start his own computer center in the disputed shop for imparting education to the students and also for computer training by installing computer etc. He has obtained diploma in computer and is well technically qualified to do this job. THE petitioner contested the application. It was stated that he was al ready employed and getting sufficient in come and did not require the shop in ques tion for computer center. THE Prescribed Authority allowed the release application by his order dated 25-3-1995 on the finding that Abhinandan Sharma son of Respon dent No. 3 will open the computer center in the disputed shop and released the dis puted shop in her favour. THE petitioner preferred an appeal. Respondent No. 1 has dismissed the appeal on 5-5-1998. I have heard Sri Rajiv Joshi, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri P. K. Jain, learned Counsel for the respon dent No. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has assailed, the finding recorded by both the authorities below on the question of bona fide need. It is con tended that Abhinandan Sharma, son of Respondent No. 3, was already doing the job and he did not require the shop in question. He placed before me the judg ment of the Prescribed Authority wherein he has observed that Abhinandan Sharma was working as an agent in company known as Pearls Green Forest Ltd. He used to deposit the amount in the bank. When he left Pearls Green Forest Ltd. , he started work in firm named Amrita Plywood Pvt. Ltd. This was done between the period 1989 to 1991. The Prescribed Authority after considering this aspect of the matter came to the conclusion that Abhinandan Sharma required the dis puted accommodation for opening his computer center as alleged by him. The application was filed in the year 1993 and if prior to that he had worked in some firm as agent, that will not show that he does not require the shop in question for opening the computer center.
(3.) THE petitioner had not shown that Abhinandan Sharma has got a vacant ac commodation available for opening the computer center. In absence of any aver ment to the effect that he had got some other vacant accommodation available the finding recorded by the authorities below that he requires the disputed shop for opening computer center does not suffer from manifest illegality. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that during the pendency of the appeal additional evidence was filed wherein it was asserted that Abhinandan Sharma, son of Respon dent No. 3 is engaged with Aptech Com pany at Delhi. It is not denied that Ab hinandan Sharma is qualified in computer work. If he has taken some job during the pendency of the proceedings it does not show that he does not require the shop for opening computer center. On the other hand it shows that he is working in various companies to teach computer to the stu dents and he wants to do the same work in his own shop by opening a computer cen ter. THE finding recorded by both the authorities that the need of the son of Respondent No. 3 to open the computer center does not suffer from any manifest illegality. In the last learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the authorities below have not properly considered the comparative hardships in accordance with law. I have perused the impugned order. The authorities below have considered this aspect. It has been found that there is no vacant accommodation available for the son of Respondent No. 3 to carry on the business and as such his need is much more bonafide.;