Sibghat Ullah Khan,J. Heard Sri Satya Prakash, learned counsel for the tenant petitioner. 2. This writ petition is directed against order dated 30.7.2013 passed by prescribed authority/JSCC, Lucknow in P.A. Case No.27 of 2011, Ratan Mohan Agarwal vs. Kalika Prasad which is a release application on the ground of bonafide need under Section 21 of U.P. Act No.13 of 1972. After conclusion of evidence and at the stage of argument tenant petitioner filed an application for inspection. Through the impugned order dated 30.7.2013 the application was disposed of with the observation that in case after hearing the arguments of learned counsel for parties inspection was found necessary it would be directed accordingly. 3. On inquiry from Court, as to why application for inspection was filed so late learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the tenant petitioner thought that the proper stage for filing such application would be after conclusion of the evidence. 4. Property in dispute is a shop situate in Sadar Bazar, Lucknow rent of which is Rs.440/-per month. It is virtually no rent by today's standard and this appears to be the main attraction for delaying the proceedings. Even the observation of the prescribed authority for considering the prayer later appears to be rather unwarranted. However as that observation has not been challenged by the landlord hence no final opinion in this regard is being expressed. 5. The writ petition is dismissed. ______________