Hon’ble Bharati Sapru, J.—Heard Sri Manish Goyal learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri R.N. Singh, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Anil Kumar Aditya, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking writ of certiorari calling for the records of the case and quashing the judgment and order dated 2.7.2008 passed by the Addl. District Judge, Allahabad in MCA No. 39 of 2008 (Satyendra Chaturvedi v. Small Scale Industries Research and Development Organisation). The second prayer is also for a writ of certiorari to quash the judgment and order dated 30.1.2008 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allahabad on the application paper No. 6-C in the Original Suit No. 1300 of 2007. The third prayer is for a writ of prohibition restraining the respondent from causing interference in the running of the unit of the petitioner on shed No. 3 Plot No. B-4, SIRDO Campus, Industrial Area P.O. T.S.L. Naini, Allahabad and the last is the residuary prayer seeking appropriate direction which the Court may deem fit and proper according to the circumstances of the case.

3. The facts of the case are that the petitioner had entered into an agreement of lease with the respondent with regard to Nursery shed No. 3, plot No. B-4, SIRDO Campus, Industrial Area P.O. T.S.L. Naini, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as the premises). The shed belongs to the respondent, which has several sheds and which it gives out to entrepreneurs to set up research projects. A copy of the lease deed dated 16.1.1993 has been filed by way of a supplementary affidavit.

4. The lease with regard to the premises is admitted to both sides. The lease was made between the two parties, initially for a period of 11 months started from 16.10.1993 for a sum of Rs. 600/- per month along with taxes and other charges. Under the terms of the lease as stated earlier, the lease was for a period of 11 months initially, which could be extended but not in any case for more than 33 months from its commencement i.e. 16.10.1993. Clause 5 of the lease is reproduced below :

“5. That with the mutual consent in writing, the period of the agreement can be extended by the parties, on the same terms and conditions or on such modified terms as may be determined by the first party. But in any case, the total period of occupations shall not be for more than thirty three months.”

Amongst other conditions, clauses 9 and 10 of the lease deed also indicate the conditions for termination of lease. The clauses 9 and 10 of the lease agreement are reproduced below :

“9. That the second party shall be permitted to use the shed/building on month-to-month basis. The lease shall be terminable by the first party by one month’s notice in writing. Likewise if the second party intends to vacate the shed/building earlier, he will also have to give one month’s notice or one month’s service charges in advance.

10. That this lease deed is for fixed term of eleven months. After the expiry of the fixed period, if one month before the fixed period is not extended, the second party shall have no right to continue as lessee and first party will have right to take possession of the shed/building at the expiry of the said period.”

5. The petitioner, who had established the manufacturing unit of the sale of protein food, minerals, vitamins products etc. under the name and style of M/s. G.S. Formulations, continued to occupy the plot leased out to it beyond the period of 11 months and thereafter even 33 months.

6. The aims and objects of the Small Industries Research & Development Organization (SIRDO) are to encourage the entrepreneurs engaged in the research projects and to allot them sheds for their research projects for specified period and thereafter the said sheds are to be allotted to new entrepreneurs engaged in the similar research work.

7. Since the premises in dispute i.e. Nursery shed No. 3, Plot No. 4 was require