Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:32394 Court No. - 4 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 64256 of 2013 Petitioner :- Mulayam Singh Respondent :- Krishna Gopal Counsel for Petitioner :- Bal Krishna Yadav,Rahul Saxena Counsel for Respondent :- Pradeep Chandra Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri Bal Krishna Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Pradeep Chandra, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. This petition is directed against the order dated 7th September, 2013 passed by the appellate authority, namely District Judge, Pilibhit, whereby the findings returned by the prescribed authority as to the bona fide need and comparative hardships have been reversed and dismissed the release application. 3. The submission advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner is that the prescribed authority has returned findings to the effect that landlord's son Sudhir Kumar was not doing anything and therefore, his father wanted to establish him. The prescribed authority concluded so on the basis of the material evidence brought on record. 4. The facts pleaded were that three shops were there; one belonged to Sunil Kumar, one belonged to Sudhir Kumar and one belonged to Umesh Kumar where father and son Umesh Kumar were doing business together and it was after father decided the share of his sons in the property that there arose need to settle Sudhir Kumar. 5. The prescribed authority returned a finding to the effect that though the pleadings were raised in the written objection filed by the tenant that Sunil Kumar was residing with his in-laws in district Bareilly and therefore, the shop was vacant but no such evidence was led, nor any survey commission was applied for so as to ascertain this fact whether the vacant shop which according to the landlord belonged to Sunil Kumar was in a vacant state or not at the time release application was filed. He submits that that these facts were apparent on record and yet court of appeal has proceeded only on the basis of pleadings raised by the defendant tenant that Sunil Kumar was residing with his in-laws. It is submitted that the findings returned by the prescribed authority could not have been upset only on the basis of the pleadings and in the absence of any material evidence. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the authorities of this Court in the case of Hari Shankar v. Rakesh Kumar, 2025 LawSuit(All) 45 and Chhedi Ram Pandey (Deceased) and others v. Malti Bajpai (Deceased) and others, 2024 LawSuit(All) 1879. 7. A counter affidavit has been filed in the matter questioning the pleadings raised in the petition and it has been pleaded only to the effect that material evidence was considered by the court below while setting aside the findings returned by the prescribed authority. However, I find this paragraph has been sworn merely on the basis of the personal knowledge but this personal knowledge does not find support in the findings returned by the court of appeal. Appellate authority has since very beginning while considering the issues of bona fide need and comparative hardships proceeded with this assumption that shop of Sunil Kumar was vacant and Sunil Kumar was residing in Bareilly and was doing business. In such circumstances, where no material was placed by tenant in support of his pleadings that Sunil Kumar was residing with his in-laws in Bareilly permanently, the findings returned by the appellate authority as to the bona fide need and comparative hardship cannot be sustained. 8. The order dated 7th September, 2013 passed by the District Judge, Pilibhit allowing the appeal by setting aside the order passed by the prescribed authority is accordingly set aside. 9. The order passed by the prescribed authority dated 23rd August, 2012 is restored. 10. The respondent tenant is granted three months' time to vacate the premises in question during which period he would continue to pay the Rs.1500/- that he has been paying throughout in respect of the premises in question under the interim order of this Court while initially granted on 28th November, 2013. Order Date :- 6.3.2025 Atmesh Digitally signed by :- ATMESH KESARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad