B.K. Rathi, J.

Heard Sri W. H. Khan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Chhotey Lai, learned counsel for Respondent No. 3.

2. THE premises in suit is house No. lll-A/214, Ashok Nagar, Kanpur Nagar. It was declared vacant on 26- 2-2001. That order of vacancy was challenged in this High Court in writ petition No. 8394 of 2001. THE writ petition was dismissed on 26-4-2001 by order Annexure-3 to the petition with the following observation: 'it is made clear that inspite of the fact that the tenanted accommodation has fallen vacant, the petitioner shall be entitled to move an application for fresh allotment in view of the proviso (b) to Rule 10 (6) of the Rules framed under the Act and if the District Magistrate is satisfied that the tenanted building as well as the other building in occupation of Ashok Chhabara are occupied separately and that there is separate messing, he may re-allot the building under the tenancy of the petitioner and his son Prem Chhabara who have become joint tenants after the death of the original tenant late Radha Kishan Chhabara. '

After the decision of the writ petition against the declaration of vacancy, the premises in dispute have been r