WPMS No. 1293 of 2010 Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J. Heard Shri Syed Nadim, Advocate for the petitioner and Shri Sudhir Kumar, Brief Holder for the State. The application of the landlord for the release of the shop in question was allowed and, eventually, by an order of the writ court dated 10th August, 2009, the landlord was directed to pay two years rent to the tenant and the tenant/petitioner was allowed to vacate the shop in question by 30th June, 2010. Today is the 27th July, 2010 and the petitioner has not as yet vacated the shop and has not complied with that part of the order which the court had directed him to comply. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is, that the landlord himself has not complied with the order and had not paid two years rent to the tenant and, therefore, he has not complied with his part of the order. The impugned order indicates that demand draft was sent by registered post to the petitioner which he has refused to accept. Consequently, it cannot be said that the landlord has not complied with his part of the order. This court is not inclined to interfere in the impugned order since the Court finds that the petitioner is not entitled for the discretionary relief since he has not complied with the order of the writ court and, in fact, has misused the undertaking given by him. The writ petition is dismissed summarily. The Executing Court is directed to ensure that the premises is vacated forthwith. A certified copy of this order shall be sent by the Registry to the Prescribed Authority within 48 hrs. for necessary compliance. (Tarun Agarwala, J.) Dated 27.07.2010 Shiv