In pursuance of the said reports, a numberice dated 15.10.1986 was alleged to have been served on the appellant wherein the appellant was required to show cause why the tenancy in respect of the premises in dispute be number regularized in favour of his brother, namely Shri Thukaram S. Vichare.
Aggrieved, the respondent filed a writ petition before the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution, challenging the Appellate Order dated 5.1.1989.
It appears that the officers of the Board inspected the premises and in their Inspection Reports dated 13.11.1985 and 23.12.1986, it was reported that the appellant was number residing in the premises and he has sublet the premises to his own brother.
Thukaram S. Vichare.
This Form C submitted by the appellant, was accepted by the Board.
Consequently, the appeal was allowed.
It appears that the appellant did number participate in the said proceedings before the Competent Authority.
Consequently, the Competent Authority, on 20th March, 1987, ordered the eviction of the appellant from the premises and regularized the tenancy in favour of respondent Shri.
It is against the aforesaid judgment the appellant is in appeal before us.
The appellant, aggrieved against the order of the Competent Authority preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority companystituted under the Act.
The Appellate Authority found that numbernotice under Section 66 of the Act having been served on the appellant tenant, the order for his eviction was illegal and void.
who was in occupation of the premises.
