- (1.) SUDHIR Narain, J. This writ peti tion is directed against the order dated 31-7-1998 passed by Respondent No. 1 rejecting the application of the petitioners to take two affidavits on the record in appeal.
(2.) THE petitioners filed an applica tion under Section 21 (1) (a) of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 for release of the disputed accommodation in possession of Respon dent No. 2 on the ground of bonafide need. THE prescribed authority rejected the ap plication. THE petitioners preferred an ap peal against the said order before the Dis trict Judge. During the pendency of appeal the petitioners filed an application to take on the record two affidavits with the allega tions that they had filed the affidavit before the prescribed authority where there was defect in the swearing clause and that necessitated the petitioners to file fresh affidavits. Respondent No. 1 rejected the application to take those affidavits on the record mainly on the ground that the defects were still existing on the affidavits filed by the petitioners before the prescribed authority. This Court passed an order on 23-9-1998 wherein the petitioners were per mitted to file the fresh affidavits duly verified and in accordance with law and if the some are filed, the same shall be con sidered by the appellate authority in ac cordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity to the respondents to produce the evidence in rebuttal. Learned Counsel for the petitioners states that in pursuance of the order passed by this Court the petitioners have filed fresh affidavits.
(3.) IN view of the order passed by this Court and fresh affidavits filed by the petitioners, this writ petition has become in-fructuous. The affidavits, if filed by the petitioners, shall be considered in accordance with law as directed by this Court in 23-9-1998. The writ petition is dismissed with the above observation. Petition dismissed. .;