- (1.) ANJANI Kumar, J. This is an application on behalf of petitioner-applicant in writ petition No. 23681 of 2004, which has been decided by the Court on 12th July, 2004.
(2.) TO appreciate the arguments advanced on behalf of learned Counsel for the petitioner-applicant in support of the present application, the following brief facts are necessary: This writ petition was decided by the Court on 12th January, 2004. The operative portion of the judgment dated 12th July, 2004 is as under: "accordingly writ petition is dismissed. However, tenant petitioner is granted six months time to vacate provided that within one month from today he files an undertaking before the prescribed authority to the effect that on or before expiry of the aforesaid period of six months he will willingly vacate and handover possession of the property in dispute to the landlord respondent. It is further directed that in case petitioner applied for allotment of shop No. 4 of building No. 87/1-A presently stated to be in tenancy occupation of Salim within fifteen days from today before RC and EO then RC and EO must decide the matter within three months from the date of filing of allotment application. RC and EO must after issuing notice to all the parties concerned including landlord and Salim, the sitting tenant of the said shop, first decide the date of construction of the shop or not. If RC and EO holds the Act to be applicable then he must decide whether it is deemed to be vacant having been let out without allotment order or not. If RC and EO holds the property to be deemed vacant then it must be allotted to the petitioner alone. Neither release application nor allotment application of any other person regarding that shop must be entertained. Dt/12-7-2004 Sd/- S. U. Khan, J. " Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner-applicant states that pursuant to the direction issued by the Court, the petitioner applies for allotment of shop No. 4 of building No. 87/1-A, presently stated to be in tenancy occupation of Salim within fifteen days from the date of judgment of this Court before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, but the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, according to the averments made in this application, has not decided the same as yet. However, the petitioner-applicant has not come up with the case that he has vacated the premises as directed by the Court within the period of six months and more than six months have passed since the passing of the judgment of the Court dated 12th July, 2004. It appears that the petitioner-applicant has filed application No. 214057 of 2004 with the following prayer: "it is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this application and the time already granted to the applicant-petitioner to vacate the shop in dispute may be extended by one year so that the dispute regarding the allotment of the shop No. 4 of Building No. 87/1-A, Lisari Road, Meerut City may be properly and completely decided by the District Supply Officer/delegated Authority, Meerut. "
(3.) ON 29th November, 2004, the Court passed the following order: "list in the next week with previous paper. " On 6th January, 2005, the Court again passed the following order: "it is most unfortunate that both the learned Counsel are arguing simultaneously making it impossible to understand anything. List this application before an other Bench. One month further time to vacate in pursuance of my order dated 12-7-2004 is granted. " Dt/-6-1-2005 Sd/- S. U. Khan, J. ";