IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 2066 of 2008 Rajpal Singh Rana … Petitioner Vs Haveli Badri Bawla, Dharamshala … Respondent Sri N.S. Negi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the judgment and order dated 09.07.2008 passed by Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge (S.D.), Haridwar in P.A. Case No. 08 of 2007, Rajpal Singh Rana Vs. Haveli Badri Bawla Dharamshala, Haridwar. 2. The petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 09.07.2007 passed by the Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge (S.D.), Haridwar whereby the court below rejected the application of the petitioner under Section 27 of the U.P. Urban Building (Regulation of Letting Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972. 3. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and award, the petitioner preferred this petition for quashing the aforesaid order of the court below. 4. Sri N.S. Negi, Advocate for the petitioner and perused the record. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the record available before me, I am of the view that the court below has not committed any illegality while passing the impugned judgment. The petitioner could not produce any documents, which may indicate that he was living as a tenant in the property in question. The petitioner produced paper No. 11/9, which is a receipt of the Dharamshala in which, the petitioner has been shown as a tourist in the said property in dispute. Further, it is admitted case that the petitioner was living in the room without having electric and water connection for about a year and it is not decipherable that which has prompted him to have the electric and water considering entire material available on record has dismissed the claim of the petitioner under Section 27 of the Rent Control Act, as this Section provided only for the tenant but the petitioner could not prove himself to be the tenant in the property in question. I do not find any illegality in the impugned judgment and award. I also do not find any merit in this petition. 6. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed in-limine. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) 01.12.2008 ASWAL