ABDUL SHAKURUL SALAM, J: --Petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the order of the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.84-R of 1987 dated 6-7-1987 whereby the respondent No.1's writ petition was allowed on the ground that the shop in .Possession of the petitioner was constructed by the respondent and had been given on rent to Taj Din son of the petitioner. Taj Din had never applied for the transfer of this shop and the petitioner was by no means entitled to the transfer of the shop constructed by the respondent.
2. Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that it is not relevant whether the respondent had constructed the shop or not. Since the petitioner was in possession, he should have been transferred the shop.
3. The contention is without force for the reason that the shop constructed by the respondent was given on rent to the son of the petitioner who never applied for its transfer. Since the petitioner himself was not in possession of the shop on the crucial date i.e. 1-1-1976, he was not entitled for its transfer. The learned Single Judge has rightly allowed the writ petition. There is no justification to interfere. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.