R.H. Zaidi, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. As requested by the learned counsel for the parties, this petition was heard and is disposed of finally at this stage. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 06.11.1999 whereby the application filed by the petitioner for setting aside the ex -parte order dated 16.01.1999 was rejected by the Prescribed Authority.
(2.) THIS petition arises out of proceedings under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972), for short the Act. It appears that the contesting respondent, Smt. Rekha Sahu, filed an application for release of the building in question, i.e., House No. 11/277 -A, Sautarganj, Kanpur before the Prescribed Authority on the ground of genuine and bona fide need. The said case was directed to proceed ex -parte and ultimately release application was allowed by judgment and order dated 16.01.1999. As soon as the petitioner came to know about the ex -parte order, he immediately filed an application on 23.02.1999 for setting aside the ex -parte order and restoring the case to its original number. The said application was objected to and opposed by the contesting respondent. The Prescribed Authority dismissed the application by judgment and order dated 06.11.1999. Hence, the present petition. While entertaining this petition, this Court passed the following order on 28.01.2000: - - The petitioner is permitted to serve respondent No. 2 personally within two weeks and file an affidavit of service within this period. In addition to it, he will take steps to serve her by registered post within one week. List for admission on 08.03.2000. Till the next date of listing, the petitioner shall not be evicted in pursuance to the impugned order provided he makes payment either by demand draft to respondent No. 2 by registered post or deposits the amount of Rs. 5,000/ - (five thousand) before respondent No. 1 within two weeks from today. In case the amount is so deposited, respondent No. 2 shall be entitled to withdraw the said amount without furnishing any security.
(3.) IT was urged by learned counsel for the petitioner that there was a delay of only seven days in filing the application for setting aside the ex -parte order which, under the facts and circumstances of the present case and in the interest of justice, was liable to be condoned. It was also urged that the order passed by this Court was already complied with. The amount of Rs. 5,000/ - was deposited before the Prescribed Authority, which the contesting respondent can withdraw, as amount of costs for setting aside the ex -parte order. The learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondent fairly conceded to the argument made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that if this Court directs the Prescribed Authority to decide the case within a reasonable time, he will have no objection if this petition is allowed. Further, he has also agreed to withdraw the amount deposited by the petitioner as amount of costs awarded to the respondent by this Court. Sub -rule (3) of Rule 15 of the Rules framed under the Act provides as under: - - 15, Application for release of buildings under occupation of tenant - - (2) ........................................................................ (3) Every application referred to in sub -rule (1) shall, as for as possible, be decided within two months from the date of its presentation. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this petition is allowed. The judgment and order dated 06.11.1999 passed by the Prescribed Authority is quashed. The Prescribed Authority - -respondent No. 1 is directed to decide the release application filed by the petitioner expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order la communicated to it. It is further directed that petitioner shall co -operate with the proceedings before the Prescribed Authority and will not seek any adjournment unless, of course, it is absolutely necessary.;