Hon’ble Arun Tandon, J.—Heard Sri P. K. Jain, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Manish Jain learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.K. Singh, learned counsel for the respondents appearing on behalf of the landlord.

2. It is not in dispute between the parties that the petitioner before this Court who is in occupation of the premise in question has been in such possession since 1994. There is no allotment order in his favour. It is further not in dispute that the provision of U.P. Urban Building (Regulation of Letting and Eviction) Act 1972 are applicable to the premise in question.

3. Courts below have recorded a finding that since no allotment order exists in favour of the occupant the premises shall be deemed to be vacant in the eyes of law. Therefore, after declaring the vacancy Courts are proceedings with the consideration of the release application of the landlord. Against the order declaring the vacancy, petitioner who is in occupation of the premise has approached this Court.

4. On behalf of the petitioner, it has been contended that in the case of Smt. Jamuna Devi v. District Judge, Kanpur Nagar and others, 2009(10) ADJ 607, Hazi Naseem Ahmad v. Rent Contr