- (1.) SUDHIR Narain, J. This writ peti tion is directed against the order dated 14-8-1987 passed by respondent No. 1, allowing the appeal and releasing the disputed shop in favour of the landlord-respondent under Section 21 (l) (a) of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (In short the Act ).
(2.) THE facts, in brief, are that the petitioner is tenant of the disputed shop. It was alleged to have been burnt on 2-4-1983. THE petitioner had filed an applica tion for repair/construction of the house. His application has been allowed. THE landlord- respondent had filed an applica tion in the year 1974 under Section 21 (l) (a) of the Act for release of the shop in question on the allegation that it was bona fide needed by the landlord-respon dent. THE application was contested by the petitioner. THE Prescribed Authority rejected the application. THE landlord had filed an appeal. THE appeal was allowed by the Appellate Authority on 27-7-1978. THE petitioner filed writ petition No. 6743 of 1979 with certain direction to decide the appeal afresh. THE appeal was decided on 14-8-1987. THE Appellate Authority, respondent No. 1, has allowed the appeal and released the shop in question. Learned Counsel for the petitioner assailed the finding recorded by the appel late authority on the question of bona fide need and comparative hardship. During the course of argument, learned Counsel for the petitioner made an offer that in case he is given a shop of an area of 5' x 10', he will vacate the shop in question. He further very frankly offered Rs. 200/- per month for such shop. Sri Ravi Kant, learned Counsel for the respondent agreed to this offer. Considering the equities between the parties the writ petition is partly al lowed. The order of the appellate authority dated 14- 8-1987 is modified to this extent that the petitioner shall vacate the shop in question provided he is given a shop of an area of 5' x 10'. The 5' will be facing Bazar. The rent of the shop will be Rs. 200 per month and even if it is newly constructed, the provisions of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 will be applicable to such shop. Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that he will vacate the shop the moment the construction starts. In case there is any dispute in regard to the compliance of this order, it will be open to the petitioner and the respondent to file an application before the Prescribed Authority to give effect to this order. If any rent is due against the petitioner that shall be paid by the tenant-petitioner within three months. Petition partly allowed. .;