JUDGMENT Rakesh Srivastava,J. This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 as well as Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. Ms. V. prabha, the petitioner, appearing in person, states that the petition be treated to have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. Heard Ms. V. Prabha, the petitioner, who has appeared in person and Shri Manish Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 1. 4. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 05.08.2014 passed by the Additional District Judge, Sitapur, in revision no. 01 of 2014, Smt. Vimla & Anr. vs. Rajendra Singh. 5. On 17.12.2013 one Rajendra Singh filed objection under Section 13 of the Act, before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer/ City Magistrate, Sitapur, stating therein that some unauthorized persons had occupied the quarters situated on the western side to the main gate of Kothi Riddhi Niketan, Batasganj, Sitapur. The said application was moved in public interest. 6. On the said application on 22.07.2014 the Rent Control and Eviction Officer/City Magistrate, Sitapur declared vacancy and invited applications for allotment of the said quarters. 7. Against the order dated 22.07.2014, the alleged unauthorized persons preferred a revision under Section 18 of the Act. By the impugned order dated 05.08.2014, the Incharge District Judge, Sitapur has admitted the said revision and has stayed the operation of the order dated 22.07.2014 mentioned above. 8. The petitioner has submitted that the order dated 22.07.2014 passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer/ City Magistrate, Sitapur, was an order under Section 12 of the Act and as such the revision under Section 18 of the Act was not maintainable and was liable to be dismissed as such. The petitioner further states that she is the landlady of the property in dispute and after the order dated 22.07.2014 declaring vacancy was passed, she has already moved an application for release of the property in dispute before the District Magistrate, Sitapur and the said application is pending. 9. After hearing the petitioner and after taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is being disposed off with liberty to the petitioner to move an appropriate application alongwith a certified copy of the order passed today in Revision No. 01 of 2014, Smt. Vimla & Anr. vs. Rajendra Singh, by 15.10.2014. 9. After hearing the petitioner and after taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is being disposed off with liberty to the petitioner to move an appropriate application alongwith a certified copy of the order passed today in Revision No. 01 of 2014, Smt. Vimla & Anr. vs. Rajendra Singh, by 15.10.2014. In case such an application is moved, the court concerned is directed to dispose of the said application in accordance with law, after hearing the counsel for the parties, within a maximum period of three months from the date the said application alongwith a certified copy of this order is placed before him.