- (1.) R. H. Zaidi, J. By means of this peti tion filed under Article 226 of the Con stitution of India, petitioner prays for is suance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 10-7-1996 whereby the application filed by respondent No. 2 under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Evic tion) Act, 1972 (U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972, for short, "the Act") was decided ex-parte against him and the order dated 15-7--2000 whereby the application filed by the petitioner for recalling the aforesaid order has been dismissed by the Prescribed Authority.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the parties have entered into a compromise and the controversy giving rise to the proceedings in the Court below /vas settled amicably. Therefore, the Prescribed Authority was not justified in rejecting the application filed by the petitioner. Ave considered the submissions made by learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. Against an ex-parte order, the petitioner was at liberty to make an ap plication for setting aside the said order, or an application to review the same. He could also file an appeal against the same. In case the parties have entered into the compromise, the easiest way for the petitioner was to file an appeal and there after file the compromise before the Ap pellate Authority. The petitioner instead of filing the appeal against the impugned order, filed an application for setting aside the same. In view of the same, I decline to interfere in the impugned order. It is, how ever, observed that it will be open to the petitioner to file an appeal against the im pugned order. If such an appeal is filed, the same shall be decided in accordance with law.
(3.) WITH these observations and direc tions, this petition stands finally disposed of. Appeal disposed of. .;