S.U. Khan, J. - (1.) List is revised. No one appears for the landlord respondent.
(2.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners.
(3.) Landlord respondent filed release application against the tenants petitioners under Section 21 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972, which was rejected by the Prescribed Authority. Against the rejection order landlord has filed Rent Appeal No. 289/ 31 which was pending in the year 1990, before the VIIth A.D.J., Kanpur Nagar. Tenants petitioners who are respondents in the appeal filed amendment application which was allowed. Thereafter second amendment application was filed which has been rejected by order dated 19th September, 1990. The said order has been challenged in the instant writ petition. Before the Lower Appellate Court while opposing amendment application landlord contended that it was a device to delay the decision of the appeal. The Appellate Court also accepted the said contention and rejected the application inter alia on the said ground. Result is further delay of 15 years by virtue of the interim order passed in this writ petition on 14th November, 1990. In case amendment application had been allowed this delay would have been avoided.;