JUDGMENT Ravi S. Dhawan, J. - This petition raises the solitary issue whether a prospective allottee can interfere with the proceedings where a release application of the landlord is being considered. The respondent No. 1, the Rent Control & Eviction Officer, Kanpur Nagar, while conscious of the proposition of law, is giving indulgence to the prospective allottee to file evidence. This is virtually giving the prospective allottee a locus standi to meddle with the proceedings, which right he does not have. On this, a Full Bench decision of this Court, reported in Talib Hasan and another v. Ist Additional District Judge, Nainital and others, 1986 ARC 1 (FB), has laid down that a prospective allottee cannot participate in proceedings when a release application of the landlord is being considered by Rent Control & Eviction Officer or the Prescribed Authority. Receiving evidence of the prospective allottee, in reference to the context, will amount to participation. The consideration of a release application is a matter between the landlord and the Court. Thus, it will be considered accordingly. 2. In so far as the respondent No. 1, the Rent Control & Eviction Officer, Kanpur Nagar, has permitted the prospective allottee to participate, this is a jurisdictional error and the proceedings are being corrected by a writ, order or direction of this Court, in the nature of certiorari. In the light of the observations which have been made by this order, the respondent No. 1 shall proceed accordingly. 3. The petition is being disposed of accordingly in the light of the observations made in this order. Thus, the petition is decided.