# In Nutan Kumar v. Additional District Judge and others, 1993

- **Citation:** (1999) 1 ILRA 165
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 1999
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/in-nutan-kumar-v-additional-district-judge-and-others-1993-39081
- **Pages:** 3

## Text

1 All.] ALLAHABAD SERIES 165
9. In view of the above principle the submission made on behalf of
the petitioner that Court should read "all other authority" who had
advanced the loan for raising the construction under the first proviso
to sub-section (2) of Section 2 of the Act No.13 of 1972, cannot be
accepted.

10. The petitioner had occupied the disputed accommodation without
any allotment order in the year 1994. The occupation of the
accommodation without any allotment order is in violation of
Section 13 of the Act which provides that where a landlord or tenant
ceases to occupy a building or part thereof, no person shall occupy it
in any capacity on his behalf or otherwise than under an order of
allotment or release under Section 16 and if a person so purports to
occupy it, he shall, without prejudice to the provisions of Section 31,
be deemed to be an unauthorised occupant of such building or part.
In Nutan Kumar vs. Additional District Judge and others, 1993
A.R.C. 204, the Full Bench of this Court has held that even if the
building is let out by the landlord and a person is in occupation of it,
his possession shall be deemed to be unauthorised under law. The
view taken by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer was that the
petitioner was in unauthorised occupation. The accommodation in
dispute shall be treated as vacant under law and he can take the
proceedings for release/allotment under Section 16 of the Act.

In view of the above the writ petition is dismissed.

25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
&,9,/ 6,'(
&,9,/ 6,'(
'$7(' $/
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
/$+$%$'
%()25(
%()25(
7+( +21·%/( %,12' .80$5 52< -
7+( +21·%/( %,12' .80$5 52< -
7+( +21·%/( 5. 6,1*+ -
7+( +21·%/( 5. 6,1*+ -
&LYLO 0LVF :ULW 3HWLWLRQ 1R RI
6LWD 5DP <DGDY
«3HWLWLRQHU
9HUVXV
6WDWH RI 83 RWKHUV
«5HVSRQGHQWV
&RXQVHO IRU WKH SHWLWLRQHU
 6UL .ULVKDQ -L .KDUH
&RXQVHO IRU WKH UHVSRQGHQWV
 6&
 6UL 6XGKLU -DLVZDO
1998
------
November, 5
166 THE INDIAN LAW REPORTS [1999
$UWLFOH RI WKH &RQVWLWXWLRQ2UHFRPPHQGDWLRQV RI WKH 'LVWULFW
-XGJHV DQG WKH 'LVWULFW 0DJLVWUDWH LV QRW ELGLQJ RQ WKH 367$7( ́
ZKLOH FRQVLGHULQJ WKH H[WHQWLRQ RI WKH VHUYLFH RI WKH $GGO 'LVWW
*RYW &RXQVHO &LYLO2D FRXQVHO FDQQRW EH WKUXVWHG RQ D OLWLJHQW WR
EHFRPH KLV FRXQVHO
By The Court

According to Sri Krishna Ji Khare learned counsel for the
petitioner, the real prayer of the petitioner is to quash the
communication made by the Joint Secretary and Joint Legal
Remembrancer, Government of Uttar Pradesh to the District
Magistrate, Ghazipur informing him that he has been directed to
communicate that in regard to his recommendation made under
clause 7.08 of the Legal Remembrancer's Manual it has been
decided after through thinking that the services of Sri Sita Ram
Yadav ( the petitioner ) as Assistant District Government Counsel
(Civil) will not be extended and, thus, Sri Yadav be relivered
immediately (as contained in Annexure-5 to this writ petitioner).

2. Sri Khare, with reference to the decision of the Apex Court in
Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi versus State of U.P. and others (1990) 2
U.P.L.B.E.C. 1174, contended that the order impugned is arbitrary
inasmuch as the recommendations made by the District Magistrate
and the District Judge concerned were based on performance of the
petitioner which were binding on the State.

3. We regret in not finding any substance in the contention. It is
always open for the State as a litigant to engage a councel of his
choice. Merely because the District Magistrate or District Judge has
made recommendations for continuance of the held that that
recommendation is binding on the state. Mr. Khare could not locate
his fingers to such a ratio decidendi in Kumari Shrilekha Vidyarthi's
case supra to support his submissions. We are of the definite view
that a councel cannot thrust on a litigant to his freedom of speech and
there is no question of violation of any fundamental right of the
petitioner of his freedom of speech and expression. We do not find
that earlier any interim releif was also granted to the petitioner.

4. We, accordingly, not finding any merit in this writ petitioner,
dismiss it but without cost.

1998
------
S.R.Yadav
 Vs.
State of U.P.
& another
------
B.K.Roy, J.
R.K.Singh, J.
1 All.] ALLAHABAD SERIES 167
5. The Office is directed to hand over a copy of this order within 1
week to Sri Sudhir Jaiswal , Learned Standing Councel, for its
communication to the Government.

25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21
&5,0,1$/ 6,'(
&5,0,1$/ 6,'(
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
'$7(' $//$+$%$'
%()25(
%()25(
7+( +21·%/( 23 -$,1 -
7+( +21·%/( 23 -$,1 -
&ULPLQDO 0LVF 3HWLWLRQ 1R RI
3DUPD 3DQGH\ RWKHUV
«3HWLWLRQHUV
9HUVXV
6WDWH RI 83 DQRWKHU
«5HVSRQGHQWV
&RXQVHO IRU WKH SHWLWLRQHU
 6UL 0DQLVK 7HZDUL
 6UL $VKZDQL .XPDU $ZDVWKL
 6UL 9& 7LZDUL
&RXQVHO IRU WKH UHVSRQGHQWV
 $*$
6HFWLRQ LELL RI &U3& %DU XQGHU WKLV VHFWLRQ LV QRW
DSSOLFDEOH WR D FDVH ZKHUH IRUJHU\ RI WKH GRFXPHQW ZDV FRPPLWWHG
EHIRUH WKH GRFXPHQW ZDV SURGXFHG LQ WKH FRXUW2%DU FUHDWHG E\
VHFWLRQ LELL RI &U3& ZRXOG EH DSSOLFDEOH ZKHUH WKH
GRFXPHQW ZDV IRUJHG ZKLOH LW ZDV FXVWRGLD OHJLV
By the Court

1. This writ petitioner is directed against the revisional judgment
dated 29th September, 1998 by District and Sessions Judge, Mau who
has dismissed the filed by the petitioners.

2. The relevant facts of the case are the respondent no.2 Vijai
Bahadur Pandey filed a criminal complaint against the present
petitioner under Sections 463,464,467,468,420 and 379 I.P.C. It was
alleged in the complaint that on 27th April,1981 the accused persons
obtained the thumb impression of one Sheo Pujan Pandey on a piece
of paper and a forged will was febricated by the accused persons.
This forged will, it is alleged, was produced by the accused persons
in mutation proceedings and later on in a civil suit instituted in the
1998
------
November, 6