( 1 ) THIS and the associated petitions for certiorari have been referred to a larger Bench by our brother Nigam on account of their raising the question whether Narottam Saran v. State of U. P. , air 1954 All 232 was correctly decided or not. The petitioners in ,all these petitions are tenants of accommodations governed by the U. P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act and owned by opposite party No. 3 of each petition. Under Section 3 (i) no suit, can without the permission of the District Magistrate, he filed in any civil court against a tenant for his eviction from any accommodation (except on one or more of certain grounds, none of which exists in these cases ). All the accommodations are situated in Lucknow city and the landlords applied to the District Magistrate, Luck-now for permission to eject the petitioners. The District Magistrate permitted the landlords in this petition and in petitions Nos. 304 and 306 and refused permission in petition No. 303. Section 3 (2), (3) and (4) lays down that when a District Magistrate grants or refuses to grant permission on a landlords application the party aggrieved may within a certain time apply to the Commissione