JUDGMENT Sudhir Agarwal,J. Heard Sri Ranjit Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. 2. Writ petition is directed against the order dated 28th July, 2011 whereby Rent Control and Eviction Officer (in short "RCEO") has declined to execute order of ejectment of respondent since Rent Revision No.27 of 2011 is pending wherein conditional interim order was passed. 3. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that since conditions were not complied with, therefore, interim order stood vacated and RCEO was bound to proceed with petitioner's application for ejectment of respondent but he has erred in law in keeping the application pending till the decision of rent revision. 4. It is evident from record that Revisional Court vide order dated 13.4.2011 stayed the order impugned in revision provided revisionist/tenant continued to deposit the rent fixed by High Court and it is said that in default of payment, stay order shall stand automatically vacated. The order dated 03.5.2011 further shows that tenant submitted Tender for deposit of Rs.6,000/- being rent of eight months, on which, since none has appeared on behalf of the landlor, another date was fixed for hearing. 5. In these facts and circumstances, petitoiner should get clarification from Revisional Court whether interim order dated 13.4.2011 passed in Revision No.27/2011 stood vacated or still continuing and only thereafter should proceed accordingly. At this stage I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. 6. Dismissed. 7. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.