Sudhir Narain Agarwal, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition is directed against an order dated 14.11.1994 whereby the appellate authority, respondent No. 1, has remanded the matter to the prescribed authority. The landlord -respondent No. 3 filed an application under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972, with the allegations that the accommodation in dispute was insufficient considering the number of his family members. The petitioner denied the allegations of the landlord -respondent. The prescribed authority rejected the application of the landlord -respondent. Aggrieved by the said order, he filed an appeal before the District Judge. The appellate authority has remanded the case to the prescribed authority to decide the matter afresh in Accordance with law with certain observations by the impugned order dated 14.11.1994. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The appellate authority took the view that the prescribed authority has not properly considered the matter in regard to the bona fide need and the hardship which the parties may suffer in the event the application is either allowed or dismissed. It was open to the appellate authority himself to examine the matter on evidence on record and to record its own finding. He was first to record a finding regarding the bona fide need of the landlord and, thereafter, consider the hardship of the parties.
(2.) IN view of the above, the impugned order dated 14.11.1994 is hereby quashed. Respondent No. 1 is directed to decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law and observations made above within a period of 3 months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is allowed.;