Satyendra Nath Srivastava vs Ist Additional District Judge, Varanasi and Others

Anjani Kumar, J.—This writ petition by the petitioner claiming that the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are the tenant filed an application u/s 21(1)(a) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 for the release of the accommodation which according to the respondents is only a tin-shed erected by them on the land which was settled down with them by the erstwhile, landlord. The prescribed authority after going through the records has found that there is no relationship of the landlord and tenant between the petitioner and respondent Nos. 3 and 4. Petitioner preferred an appeal. The appellate authority endorsed the findings recorded by the prescribed authority and have held that since serious dispute of title has been raised denying the right of the petitioner for either land or premises which can be settled down only by regular civil court, so application u/s 21(1)(a) will not be maintainable. It is these findings, which are tried to be assailed by the petitioner solely relying upon the assessment orders passed by the Nagar Palika. The appellate authority has also found that there is a serious dispute with regard to the title and U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 is not a proper machinery available to the petitioner.

In this view of the matter, in the teeth of the findings recorded by the prescribed authority as well as authority that there is serious dispute of title, this Court declines to, interfere with the findings recorded by the two courts below under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the, writ petition deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.