AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Katju, J.—This writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of prohibition for staying proceedings in case under Section 16 read with Section 12 of Act No. 13 of 1972, Bishan Swarup Bamal v. Mahesh Chand God and another pending before Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Agra.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the petitioner should raise all points which they wish to urge before respondent No. 1 and these points will be considered by the said respondent.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has urged that in the release application filed by the landlord under Section 16 the case is between the landlord and the authority alone. He has invited my attention to a Full Bench decision of this Court in Talib Hasan v. Additional District Judge, 1986 (1) ARC 1 where it has been held that the prospective allottee has no right to contest the release application under Section 16. In my opinion this decision is distinguishable. The petitioners are not prospective allottee but their claim to be the actual tenants. In my opinion where there isps an actual tenant then if the landlord files an application for release under Section 16 claiming that there was deemed vacancy such actual tenant must be heard before deciding the release application.
In case there is a deemed vacancy natural justice requires that such actual tenant be heard before passing the order under Section 16. In the circumstances, I dismiss the petition but it is open to the petitioners to contest the application under Section 16. In the said proceedings the can raise all pleas.
With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of finally.
W. P. dismissed.