IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (MS) No. 1649 of 2010 Rajeev Nain Badoni …..Petitioner. Versus Arvind Mohan Badoni ……..Respondent. Present : Mr. Pradeep Hairiya, Advocate for the petitioner. Date of Decision: 23.9.2010 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, who is allegedly a landlord of a premises, namely, House No. 226/262 sitauted at Block No. 3, Khurbuda Mohalla, Dehradun. The sole prayer of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that in a proceedings which commenced under U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 (from hereinafter referred to as the Act), a revision being Rent Control Revision No. 14 of 1982 is pending before the III Additional District Judge, Dehradun. 3. The matter is pending since 1982. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no interim order of any Court which prohibits the Court from proceeding in the matter and the inordinate delay has caused undue hardship to the petitioner. The revision was originally filed by the father of the petitioner in the year 1982, who has passed away during the pendency of the revision. 4. Perused the order sheets relating to Rent Control Revision No. 14 of 1982, which are annexed and marked as Annexure-3 to the writ petition. It appears that this matter has continuously been adjourned since 1982. Whatever be the reason of adjournment, there is still no plausible reasons for this revision to remain pending for so long. Even the Rules framed under U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 prescribed a period within which the procedure must conclude, as far as possible. 5. Normally the Court does not put a time frame for the Court below to dispose matters, as it may amount to an interference in a Court 2 proceeding. However, it would be a travesty of justice if this matter remains pending in the Court below for any reason whatsoever. The matter has to be expedited. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: The court below is directed to decide the Rent Control Revision No. 14 of 1982 as expeditiously as possible, but definitely within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the Court below. 6. The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the Court concerned for apprisal and necessary compliance. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 23.9.2010 Rathour