1. The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioners to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 30/06/2004 passed by learned Sessions Court, Nadiad in Criminal Revision Application No.65 of 2004 as well as the order dated 19/05/2003 passed in POL Case No.1 of 2003 in exercise of powers under Section 145 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
2. After the matter was argued for sometime, Mr.Asim Pandya, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners does not press the present petition and seeks permission to withdraw the present petition. However, he has requested to make suitable observations that the proceedings before the Mamlatdar under the Tenancy Act be considered in accordance with law and on merits. He has also requested that whatever order of status quo is granted, the same be continued till final disposal of the tenancy proceedings.
3. Mr.Kinariwala, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the contesting private respondent has submitted that he has no objection, if the petitioners are permitted to withdraw the present petition and status quo is directed to be continued till tenancy proceedings are decided by the Mamlatdar. However, he has submitted that in view of the withdrawal of the present petition, findings of the learned Magistrate, which have been confirmed by the learned Revisional Court shall be continued and are not affected.
4. In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn. It goes without saying that the concerned authority under the Tenancy Act is bound to consider the dispute with respect to tenancy in accordance with law and on merits. Until the proceedings are concluded by the Tenancy Court, the order of status quo which has been granted by this Court in the tenancy proceedings are hereby directed to be continued. However, it is clear that the observations of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and confirmed by Revisional Court in the order dated 30/06/2004 still remains. Rule is discharged.
[M.R.SHAH,J] *dipti