Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Heard Sri Zafaryab Jilani, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Zainuddin Siddiqui, Advocate for the petitioner. None has appeared for the respondent in Writ Petition No.6612 of 1990 while in others Sri Manish and Pankaj Srivastava have appeared. Since these cases have been listed in the category of old cases, I proceed to decide the matter.

2. Since common questions of facts and law are involved in all these writ petitions, therefore, as requested and agreed by learned counsel for the parties, the same are being decided by this common judgment. However, for the purpose of facts, writ petition No. 6612 of 1990 is being treated as leading case and pleadings are being referred therefrom.

3. The proceedings were initiated by petitioner-State for ejectment of respondent No. 3 from accommodation in question under the provisions of U.P. Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1972”).

4. Respondent No. 3 took objection that he has perfected his rights of ownership by application of principle of adverse possession i.e. Prescription and, therefore, he cannot be evicted from premises in