- (1.) Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record. Learned counsel for the petitioners says that he does not want to file rejoinder affidavit. With the consent of parties' counsel the writ petition has been heard finally.
(2.) Mr. Mohd. Arif Khan, learned Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Mohiuddin Khan, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the proceedings under Sections 20 and 21 of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulations of Letting, Rent & Eviction) Act 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') are altogether different and on the basis of the order passed in SCC Revision No. 4 of 2011 arising out of the proceedings under Section 20 of the said Act, the proceedings relating to Section 21(1)(a) of the Act cannot be stayed. However, by the impugned order dated 16.8.2011, the learned trial court has observed that the order of the High Court passed in SCC Revision is relating to the property in question and considering the order of the High Court the application dated 2.8.2011 is disposed of and the parties shall inform further order passed in the Civil Revision No. 4 of 2011 on the next date.
(3.) Contention is that the learned Court below has refused to proceed to decide the application under Section 21(1)(a) of the Act on the basis of the order dated 13.1.2011 passed in SCC Revision No. 4 of 2011, although the proceedings under Section 21(1)(a) of the Act are altogether different to the proceedings arising out of Section 20 of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulations of Letting, Rent & Eviction) Act 1972.;