JUDGMENT Ravi S. Dhavan, J. - The predecessor in interest of the petitioners had an allotment order in reference to the premises in dispute. The allotment order was cancelled on an application of the landlord under sub-clause (5) of Section 16 of the Act XIII of 1972. 2. Against this, a revision is pending before the District Judge. The revision was filed by the allottee. He died during the pendency of the revision. 3. The petitioner attempted to file certain papers as evidence in Revision No. 126 of 1982 pending before the IInd Additional District Judge, Meerut. This request was denied by the learned District Judge by an order dated 20th February, 1987. Against this order, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition. 4. It has been accepted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that the application seeking permission to file evidence, which permission has been denied is an interlocutory order. This aggrieved the petitioners and, thus, the petition. In the facts and circumstances of this case it would be appropriate not to interfere with the order dated 20-2-1987 impugned in this writ petition. 5. After the making submission before the Court, learned Counsel sought indulgence of this Court to treat this petition as not pressed. The request is accepted and this petition will be treated as such and consigned to the Record Room, though connected with Civil Misc. Writ No. 5559 of 1987, Smt. Asha Lal Rolston and another v. IInd Additional District Judge and others, on which orders were passed on 25th March, 1987, Reported in 1987 (1) ARC 334. 6. A copy of this order be given to the learned Counsel for the petitioner on payment of usual charges within three days.