VEENA EAGLETON, F.C. - (1.) THIS is a revision petition against the order dated 20.4.2000 passed by Commissioner, Hisar Division and order dated 15.4.1998 and 24.3.1998 passed by the Assistant Collector, Ist Grade, Dabwali.
(2.) BRIEF facts of this case are that respondents filed eviction application on 18.7.1997 who vide his order dated 24.3.1998 assessed Rs. 4,597/- as arrears of rent payable by the petitioners to be deposited by 7.4.1998. By another order dated 15.4.1998 the Assistant Collector, Ist Grade passed eviction order. The petitioners filed an appeal before the Collector who vide his order dated 8.5.1998 set aside both the orders of eviction passed against the petitioners. The Collector also extended the period of payment of rent by two years. Against this order of the Collector, the respondents filed a revision before the Commissioner who accepted the revision and set aside the order of the Collector. Against this order of the Commissioner, this revision petition has been filed before this Court. The counsel for the petitioners gave written arguments in which he has mentioned that the Collector could condone the delay in depositing the rent. He has further mentioned that there has been an error in commuting 15 days time as the first order was passed on 24.3.1998 by the Assistant Collector, Ist Grade. However, because of some technical flaw in this case, another order was passed 21.4.1998 within scheduled time.
(3.) THE counsel for the respondent argued that the Commissioner's orders are based on merits. The Collector has no power to extend the time. He cited 1980 PLJ page 603, 1998(2) PLJ page 183, 1983 PLJ page 411 and 1980 PLJ page 177. He further argued that mere acceptance of rent after the statutory period will not absolve the tenant from ejection.;