Anjani Kumar, J.—Heard Sri Ashish Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the State as well as Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for the contesting respondent.

2. The petitioner aggrieved by an order passed by Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Etawah, dated 11th March, 1987, whereby the application for setting aside the ex parte order dated 2nd January, 1987, has been refused to be interfered with on the ground that the deemed vacancy has already been notified, therefore, the order cannot be recalled in exercise of power under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, approached the revisional court, who maintained the order passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer and dismissed the revision. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner approached this Court by means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

3. Admittedly, no revision lies and remedy of pursuing the revision was misconceived. However, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in that event this writ petition be treated a writ petition against the order passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer. Learn