Judgment :- 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. This civil revision petition is focussed as against the return of MPSR No.12109 of 2011 in RCOP No.49 of 2010, which was one for getting the ex parte order of eviction set aside by the learned Rent Controller. 3. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner would portray and project the case of the revision petitioner to the effect that no notice was served as contemplated under law, on the revision petitioner in the said RCOP wherein the eviction order was passed by the court below by proceeding exparte showing as though despite service of notice, there was no appearance on the part of the revision petitioner. 4. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is his case that no notice was served and from the date of knowledge alone, the limitation period was calculated and the application was filed for getting the exparte order of eviction set aside and hence it is for them to prove the fact and get suitable orders and it is not for the court to mandate that an application to get the delay condoned has to be filed along with the application to get set aside the exparte order. 5. Perused the records including the docket order. I am of the considered view that the petitioner should stand or fall on his own averments and it is not for the court to mandate anything. Here the petitioner has come forward with a specific plea that no notice in the RCOP proceedings was served and hence from the date of his knowledge, so to say, within 30 days the application was filed before the Rent Controller, but it was returned. 6. I am of the considered view that the Rent Controller in matters of this nature, need not return the application, if it is otherwise than in order. Assuming for the argument's sake, in the course of the proceedings in the said petition, for getting set aside the exparte order, if it is found that the notice in RCOP was duly served on the revision petitioner and nevertheless he did not appear, then the petition has to be dismissed or else the petition has to be allowed. Such being the peculiar situation in this case, the returning of the petition would not arise. 7. Such being the peculiar situation in this case, the returning of the petition would not arise. 7. Accordingly, this revision is allowed and the revision petitioner is given an opportunity to represent the papers before the court below on or before 23.04.2012. 8. Registry is directed to return the original papers filed in this civil revision petition to the learned counsel for the petitioner immediately. The Rent Controller shall number the petition, if it is otherwise than in order. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.