The requisitioning of accommodation for government employees is deemed a public purpose and the courts are limited in scrutinizing such administrative actions.

1. This petition came before our brother Mukerji. He, however, directed that it should be laid before a larger Bench, and, therefore, it has come before us.

2. The petitioner is a partnership firm carrying on the business of disinfectants on the first floor of 84, Kanpur Road, Lucknow. The partners of the aforesaid firm are Sri Suraj Prakash Vohra and Sri Trilok Vohra, who are real brothers.

3. It is alleged that the aforesaid partners carried on their business since 1933 and eventually they shifted to the premises in dispute from where the aforesaid partnership business was carried on. The two partners, subsequently occupied separate residential accommodation in Lucknow. Sri Trilok Vohra lived in 23 - C, Singar Nagar, Lucknow, while Sri Suraj Prakash Vohra lived separately in Ashiq Ali Building. It appears that the premises in dispute, viz., No. 84, Kanpur Road, Lucknow were sought to be allotted by the Area Rationing Officer. On 5th of June, 1961, the Area Rationing Officer sent a notice to the landlord of the premises, Sri B. P. Agarwal intimating that the aforesaid premises, which were "vacated by Sri Surya Prakash", were being considered for the allotment in favour of Sri Virendra Singh Shrineh Journalist, Information Department, Lucknow. The landlord was required to file objections, if any, against the proposed allotment.
Thereafter on the 6th of June, 1961, the Area Rationing Officer ordered that the premises in dispute shall be let to Sri Virendra Singh by the aforesaid said landlord after it was vacated by Sri Surya Pradesh. Sri Surya Prakaah Vohra thereupon preferred an objection before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer saying that the said premises were never vacated, nor there was any likelihood of their being vacated in the near future and he, therefore, prayed that the aforesaid allotment should be cancelled. Thereafter on the 23rd of June, 1961, the Rent Control and Eviction Officer issued a notice under S.7A, sub-section (1) of the U. P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act to the landlord of the aforesaid premises requiring him to show cause why the premises in dispute had been occupied in disregard and in contravention of the provisions of the aforesaid section. Objection was preferred by the landlords saying that the accommodation in dispute had not been vacated at all and there was, therefore, no question of the landlord's occupying the same. The present petitioner also preferred an objection against the aforesaid notice under S.7 - A, sub-section (1) saying that the premises were being occupied by the petitioner firm and the firm was having its office in it since the last fifteen years and it had not been vacated nor was there any intention to vacate the same and, therefore, the question of the occupation by the landlord did not arise at all.
Thereafter on the 24th of July, 1961, the District Magistrate of Lucknow issued an order under S.3 of the U. P. (Temporary) Accommodation Requisition Act of 1947 directing that the premises in dispute were required for housing a Government servant, which was a public purpose and the said accommodation be delivered to him within fifteen days of the service of the order. The aforesaid order further stated as follows : -
"And whereas, I am further satisfied that the present occupier of the accommodation has at his disposal sufficient accommodation at 23 - C, Singar Nagar and in Ashiq Ali Building, Pandariba, Charbagh Lucknow and a spacious godown in Ghai Bhawan just next to 84, Kanpur Road, Lucknow, for the purpose of his residence and business and that he does not need any other alternative accommodation for himself."
The s