Vikram Nath,J. Civil Misc. Restoration Application No.331313 of 2011 with Civil Misc. Delay Condonation Application ??.331312 of 2011: Cause shown for delay in filing the restoration application is sufficient. Delay is condoned. 2. Further cause shown for recalling the order dated 4.8.2005 dismissing the writ petition is default is recalled. Petition is restored to its original number. 3. Both the applications are accordingly allowed. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the material on record. 5. This petition has been filed assailing the correctness of the judgment and order dated 22.4.1991 passed by the 5th Additional District Judge, Agra in Rent Control Appeal No.8 of 1982, Noori alias Noor Mohammad and others vs. Smt. Bishan Devi, whereby the appeal of the petitioners preferred against the order 26.2.1982 passed by the Prescribed Authority, Fatehabad, Agra in P.A. Case No.30 of 1976, Smt. Bishan Devi vs. Noori alias Noor Mohammad, whereby the release application of the respondent-landlords was allowed under Section 21 (1) (b) of the U.P. Urban Building (Regulation of Letting Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the 1972 Act) has been dismissed. 6. From a perusal of the order passed by the Prescribed Authority it appears that after considering the mandatory conditions as required under Rule 17 of the Rules framed under the 1972 Act were found to have been fulfilled and the building being in dilapidated condition was required for the purpose of demolition and new construction. Said findings are based upon consideration of material evidence on record. Further the Appellate Authority also examined the material on record and concurred with the findings recorded by the Prescribed Authority. The findings so recorded being pure findings of facts based upon consideration of material evidence on record do not require any interference in writ jurisdiction. 7. Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. 8. At this stage Sri Ramesh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners prayed for a reasonable time being allowed to vacate the premises. Learned counsel for the respondent although opposed the request for grant of time but submitted that the court may allow not more than three months time to the petitioners to vacate the premises. 9. 8. At this stage Sri Ramesh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners prayed for a reasonable time being allowed to vacate the premises. Learned counsel for the respondent although opposed the request for grant of time but submitted that the court may allow not more than three months time to the petitioners to vacate the premises. 9. Considering the nature of request and also the fact that in 1982, the Prescribed Authority had allowed the petition of the respondents for the release and it is almost 37 years since that the matter is pending, the submission of the learned counsel for the respondents appears to be justified. Accordingly three months time is allowed to the petitioners to vacate the premises subject to the following conditions being fulfilled- 1. The tenant-petitioners shall file before concerned Prescribed Authority, on or before 30th November, 2013, an application along with their affidavit giving an unconditional undertaking to comply with all the conditions mentioned hereinafter: 2. Petitioners-tenant shall not be evicted from the accommodation in his tenancy up to 14th February, 2014. Tenant-petitioners, their representative / assignee, etc, claiming through them or otherwise, if any, shall vacate without objection and peacefully deliver vacant possession of the accommodation in question on or before 14th February, 2014 to the landlord or landlord's nominee/representative (if any, appointed and intimated by the landlord) by giving prior advance notice and notifying to the landlord by Registered A.D post (on his last known address or as may be disclosed in advance by the landlord in writing before the concerned Prescribed Authority). time and date on which Landlord is to take possession from the tenant. 3. Petitioners shall on or before 30th November, 2014 deposit entire amount due towards rent etc. up to date i.e. entire arrears of the past, if any, as well as the rent for the period ending on the 14th February, 2014. 4. Petitioners and everyone claiming under undertake not to 'change' or 'damage' or transfer/alienate/assign in any manner, the accommodation in question. 5. In case tenant-petitioners fail to comply with any of the conditions/or direction/s contained in this order, landlord shall be entitled to evict the tenant-petitioners forthwith from the accommodation in question by seeking police force through concerned prescribed authority. 6. Petitioners and everyone claiming under undertake not to 'change' or 'damage' or transfer/alienate/assign in any manner, the accommodation in question. 5. In case tenant-petitioners fail to comply with any of the conditions/or direction/s contained in this order, landlord shall be entitled to evict the tenant-petitioners forthwith from the accommodation in question by seeking police force through concerned prescribed authority. 6. If there is violation of the under taking of anyone or more of the conditions contained in this order, the defaulting party shall pay Rs.25000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) as damages to the other party besides rendering himself/herself liable to be prosecuted for committing grossest contempt of the Court. _______________