Rajesh Tandon, J. - (1.) BY the present writ petition, the petitioner has sought to quash the order dated 9th May, 2005 by which the application for cross -examination has been rejected. Briefly stated, an application under section 21(1)(a) and under section 21(1)(A) of U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 was filed praying for release of the property being property No.
(2.) THE property of the respondent No. 2 has been shown to be the property , where the petitioner is a tenant in respect of the property at the rate of Rs. 1,000/ - per month according to the case of the respondent No. 2. Release was sought on the ground that he was retired on 2003 from I.D.P.L. and the premises is required for his use and occupation.
(3.) IN paragraph 1 of the application, it has been mentioned that the respondent No. 2 is the landlord. The said statement is quoted below: - -;