ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
SINGLE BENCH
ALOK GUPTA
Vs.
DISTRICT JUDGE, RENT TRIBUNAL AND OTHERS
( Before : Ashutosh Srivastava, J. )
Tenancy-Writ Appeal No. – 2030 of 2024 with Writ Appeal No. 2572 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 2034 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 2032 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 2031 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 2593 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 2594 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 2603 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 2091 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 2098 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 2132 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 2137 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 2300 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 2144 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 2148 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 2176 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 1884 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 1886 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 1892 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 1895 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 1896 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 1898 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 1899 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 1900 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 1901 of 2024, Writ Appeal No. 1902 of 2024 and Writ Appeal No. 3300 of 2024.
Decided on : 12-03-2024
“U.P. Rent Control Act vs. Public Trust Status: Varanasi Tenants Fight Eviction Through Writ Petition”
U.P. Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021 – Sections 4(3), 21(1), 21(2)(f) and 31 – The petitioners are tenants of different shop numbers situated in buildings in Varanasi – The writ petition arises out of the proceedings undertaken under the U.P. Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021 – The controversy in both sets of writ petitions is similar in nature and the impugned orders have been assailed on identical grounds – With the consent of the parties, all writ petitions are being finally decided at the admission stage – The leading writ petition, Writ A No. 2030 of 2024, is being treated as the case – The petitioner filed a writ petition assailing the order dated 16.01.2024 passed by the Rent Tribunal/District Judge, Varanasi, in Rent Appeal No. 145 of 2023 – The Rent Tribunal dismissed the Rent Appeal and upheld the order of the Rent Authority/Additional District Magistrate (City), District- Varanasi, dated 30.06.2023, allowing the Release Application registered as Case No. 290 of 2023 and directed the petitioner to vacate shop No. 29 under his tenancy – The Rent Tribunal found that the Landlord/Respondent was a registered Public Charitable Trust and the Act did not apply to it by virtue of Section 3 (iv) of the Act – The Application under Section 21 (2) was not maintainable under Section 46 (2) of the Act, as the notice dated 22.09.2022 was given on which date the SCC Suit No. 28 of 2014 was maintainable and liable to be continued as per Section 46 (2) – The Court found no error in the approach adopted by the Rent Tribunal and agreed with the Rent Tribunal that there is no error or illegality in the conclusion drawn.
Counsel for Appearing Parties
Sharad Malviya, Advocate, Counsel for Petitioner; Deepak Kumar,Sharad Malviya, Counsel for Respondent.
ORDER
Ashutosh Srivastava, J. – Heard Sri Sharad Malviya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Deepak Kumar as well as Shri Ashish Kumar Srivastava, learned counsels for the landlord/respondent no.3.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to delete the respondent nos. 1 and 2 from the array of parties.
3. The petitioners of first set of writ petitions are tenants of different shop numbers situated in building No. CK62/19, 20, 21 and 22 Kashipura (West), Ward Chowk, Tehsil and District Varanasi, whereas, the petitioners of second set of the writ petitions are tenants of different shop numbers situated in building B-30/5A, Vikram Building, situate at Lanka-BHU, Main Road, Varanasi.
4. The writ petition arise out of the proceedings undertaken under the U.P. Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021 ( UP Act No. 16 of 2021).
5. The controversy involved in both sets of the writ petitions are similar in nature and the impugned orders have been assailed on identical grounds. Hence, with the consent of the parties all the writ petitions are being finally decided at the admission stage itself.
6. The writ petition, being Writ A No. 2030 of 2024, is being treated as the leading writ petition and the facts pertaining to the same are being considered for deciding the controversy involved.
7. The writ petition, being Writ A No. 2030 of 2024, at the instance of the Tenant/ Petitioner has been filed assailing the order dated 16.01.2024 passed by the Rent Tribunal/ District Judge, Varanasi, in Rent Appeal No. 145 of 2023, whereby and whereunder the Rent Appeal has been dismissed and order of the Rent Authority/Additional District Magistrate (City), District-Varanasi, dated 30.06.2023 allowing the Release Application registered as Case No. 290 of 2023 has been upheld and the petitioner has been directed to vacate the shop No. 29 under his tenancy.
8. It is the case of the petitioner that he is a tenant of shop No. 29 situate in premises No. CK62/19, 20, 21 and 22 Kashipura (West), Ward Chowk, Tehsil and District Varanasi at a monthly rent of Rs. 230/- inclusive of Sewer and water charges. The respondent no. 3 is his landlord. The petitioner has paid the entire rent of the shop till July, 2013 under receipt, however the landlord/ respondent refused to accept the Rent from August 2013 and since then the rent is being deposited under Section 30 (1) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 in Misc. Case No. 28 of 2014. the Landlord/ Respondent no. 3 tried to dispossess the Tenant/Petitioner by force and petitioner was compelled to instituted a suit for permanent injunction being Original Suit No. 597 of 2014 in which temporary injunction was granted in favour of the petitioner that he shall not be evicted otherwise than in accordance with law. The respondent no. 3 thereafter filed SCC Suit No. 28 of 2014 before the Judge, Small Cause Court for ejectment, recovery of arrears of rent and damages for use and occupation. The petitioner appeared in the suit and filed his written statement. However meanwhile the UP Act No. 16 of 2021 was enacted and the respondent no. 3 withdrew the SCC suit No. 28 of 2014.
9
