Sudhir Agarwal, J.— Called in revised. None appeared on behalf of petitioner. Sri Ashish Agrawal, learned counsel for respondents is present. However, I have perused the record. 2. It appears that Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Lalitpur determined rent under Section 21(8) of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1972") in respect to property in dispute as Rs. 6168/- per month w.e.f. 03.01.1996, whereagainst petitioner-tenants and respondent-landlords both filed appeals. Petitioner-tenants' Appeal No. 02 of 2003 has been rejected but respondent-landlords' Appeal No. 01 of 2003 has been partly allowed determining rent as Rs. 10,449/- per month w.e.f. 18.02.1993. 3. Having gone through the impugned orders as also pleadings and grounds taken in writ petition, I do not find any error apparent on face of record in the orders impugned in this writ petition warranting interference. 4. Dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. Petition dismissed. _____________