- (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties. This petition is against the order of eviction passed under the U.P. Muslims Waqf Act, 1963. When this petition was entertained, the following conditional interim order was passed on 7th of June, 2000: Respondent No. 4 is represented by Sarv Shri A.P. Shahi and Shri G.K. Singh, respondent Nos. 1 and 2 by learned Standing Counsel, respondent No. 3 may be served for which petitioner shall submit requisite in the registry within three days from today. Office shall dispatch notice by R.P.A.D. within one week of the receipt provided steps are taken within the stipulated time. Office shall indicate that the case shall be listed on 21.8.2000. Cases shall be listed on the next date alongwith the office report regarding service on respondent No. 3. Shri G.K. Singh, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 4 prays for and is allowed one month's time to file counter-affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within two weeks of the receipt of the counter-affidavit. Respondents are restraining from dispossessing the petitioner from the shops in question (part of building No. 15/34 Mohalla Faridpura, Varanasi) on the basis of the order dated 15.12.1988 provided the petitioner deposit entire arrears of rent/damages (after adjustment any amount deposited) on or before 30.6.2000 with respondent No. 3 U.P. Sunni Central Board of Waqf and in case the said opposite party refuses to accept the same, petitioner will be at liberty to deposit it with the Collector, Varanasi. If petitioner commits default of the above condition, interim order shall stand discharged automatically.
(2.) Again further direction was issued on 21st of August, 2000 and 28th of August, 2000 for depositing the amount. However, despite specific statement on behalf of the Counsel for the respondent, nothing was brought on record to show that the conditions of the interim order was complied and thus the following order was passed on 18th of February, 2010: List peremptorily in the next cause list and in case the petitioner does not disclose and bring on record as to whether he has complied with the stay order and the subsequent orders passed by this Court for payment of entire rent, the petition may be dismissed on this ground alone.
(3.) Even today, nothing has been brought on record to show that the rent/damages have been deposited.;