- (1.) ANJANI Kumar, J. By means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 29th May, 2004, passed by the Prescribed Authority/additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Varanasi in PA Misc Case No. 2 of 2004 (Virendra Kumar v. Satya Narayan Prasad) and the order dated 13th July, 2004, passed by the appellate Court in Rent Control Appeal No. 2 of 2004, Satya Narayan Prasad v. Virendra Kumar and others, copies whereof are annexed as Annexure Nos. '8' and '9' to the writ petition.
(2.) AT the outset, a preliminary objection is raised on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioner that no appeal lay against the order dated 29th May, 2004, therefore, there is no error in the order passed by the appellate Court, as the appellate Court has dismissed the appeal on the ground that appeal is not maintainable. This objection, if allowed to sustain, as submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, will not come as restrain by this Court to entertain this proceeding with regard to the alternative remedy, he therefore, prays that this writ petition may be treated to be a writ petition challenging the order dated 29th May, 2004, passed by the prescribed authority. The prayer is allowed. The present writ petition is directed against the order dated 29th May, 2004, whereby an application to set aside the ex- parte order has been allowed by the prescribed authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner has fairly conceded that in view of the view taken by the apex Court, particularly in view of the case reported in 1978 ARC page 496, Ramji Dass and others v. Mohan Singh, wherein the apex Court laid down that the endeavour of the Court should be decided the case on merits rather than on technicalities. In the facts and circumstances of the present case and also in the interest of justice, I direct the prescribed authority to decide the application filed by the petitioner-landlord on merits afresh without taking into account the impugned order dated 29th May, 2004 and the respective parties are directed to raise such objections, on facts and law both, as are open to them, as the respondent-tenant will not be ousted only on the ground that before filing of this writ petition, the landlord has taken possession of the accommodation in question. Both the parties have undertaken that the parties shall appear before the prescribed authority on or before 9th August, 2004 and the prescribed authority shall decide the matter before 15th November, 2004. List this writ petition again on 18th November, 2004. Both the parties are directed to maintain status- quo as on today with regard to the premises in question till 18th November, 2004. .;