Hon’ble Attau Rahman Masoodi, J.—Heard Sri Arvind Razdan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Kabir Ahmad Khan, assisted by Sri Anurag Srivastava, learned counsel for opposite party No. 3.

Opposite party No. 4 is the landlord who has neither disputed the petitioner’s tenancy nor participated in the proceedings from the very inception and for this reason, notice to opposite party No. 4 was dispensed with.

2. The petitioner claims to be a tenant of the disputed residential accommodation situated on the second floor of the building known as house No. 332/127, Chowk Road, Opp. Hina Market, Lucknow which comprises of three rooms, kitchen, latrine and bathroom and one mumty elevation on the terrace inclusively.

3. The record reveals that an application in the prescribed form-A was filed by opposite party No. 3 before the Prescribed Authority i.e. Rent Control & Eviction Officer (hereinafter referred to as R.C. & E.O.) on 25.5.2015 under Section 16(1)(a) of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred as the U.P.R.C. Act). The opposite party No. 3 in the release application so filed indicated the accommodation in question t