M.L.Bhat, J.

1. The petitioner challenges the order of respondent No. 1 whereby he has upheld the order of the respondent no. 2.

2. The facts giving rise to this petition can be put in a breif compass.

The petitioner claims to be a tenant of one Tej Bahadur who was mortgagee of some residential property in Bareilly. The mortgagor, Chandra Bahadur, Respondent no. 3, herein seems to have mortgaged his residential property to Tej Bahadur (since dead), who is represented by respondents no. 4 and 5 in the writ petition, in lieu of Rs. 3000/-. The mortgage deed was executed on 12-5-1972 and the period of mortgage was three years. The petitioner avers that the mortgagor became tenant of the mortgagee. The mortgagee, therefore, had filed a suit for ejectment and recovery of arrears of rent against the mortgagor and against the petitioner, who was held by the trial court as sub-tenant of the property. The petitioner tenant thereafter filed a civil revision No. 178 of 1976, which was decided on the basis of a compromise on 15-2-1977 by the court of the District Judge, Bareilly. The petitioner was held to be a tenant and not a sub-tenant of the mortgagor with effect from October, 1975.