JUDGMENT Anshuman Singh, J. - This a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, arising out of proceedings under Section 21 of U.P. Act 13 of 1972. The petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated July 30, 1987 passed by the IInd Additional Civil Judge, Kanpur Nagar, allowing the restoration application of the tenant respondents. The petitioner filed an application under Section 21 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 before the Prescribed Authority and obtained an ex parte order. The restoration application filed by the tenant respondent has been allowed by the Appellate Court. It is admitted fact that the tenant respondent was not served personally. The service was held to be sufficient by refusal. The restoration application has been allowed by the Appellate Court and the delay in filing the same has been condoned. In my opinion where the question of eviction of a tenant is involved it is always expedient that the tenant must be served personally end the landlord should not be allowed to get the tenant evicted merely on service by refusal, because the eviction of the tenant create so many complications any may put the tenant some time in difficult situations. Moreover, once the Court has exercised discretion in favour of the tenant condoning the delay and restoring the application, in my opinion, it is not proper for this Court to interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, The petition is accordingly rejected and the Prescribed Authority is directed to dispose of the application under Section 21 of the aforesaid Act within thirty days from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. Since the respondent tenant has already been evicted, he shall not be put in possession till the disposal of the application under Section 21 of the aforesaid Act. 2. Let a copy of this order be supplied to the learned Counsel for the petitioner on payment of usual charges today.